The Cargo Cutout
12-22-2011, 05:02 PM
#42
Indian Takeout Driver
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: FAR part 347 (91+121+135)
Posts: 1,566
Originally Posted by navigatro
I am not bashing the President (I voted for him, in fact). It is simply politics and $$$. If the OMB (white house) says it is too expensive (cost/benefit), then the FAA (under direction/pressure from the President) will change the regulation. That is the way Washington works.
I certainly didn't vote for him so gays can serve and marry!
I've voted for my last Democrat (and I'll only vote Libertarian like Ron Paul for the other choice)..
12-22-2011, 05:04 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: 767 Seat 1A
Posts: 222
Originally Posted by onetime
So you voted for the Palin show? There's a credibility booster. Just sayin'
(BTW, you might have missed the
at the end of my previous post. I don't much care for ANY of the current crop of politicians, just sayin')Back to the regularly scheduled cargo cutout.
12-22-2011, 05:11 PM
#44
Permanent Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,677
Originally Posted by Nitefrater
So it's not too expensive for the pax carriers, most of which are in, just coming out of, or floating just above bankruptcy, but it's too expensive for the (relatively) prosperous cargo carriers... interesting logic.
12-22-2011, 06:49 PM
#45
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by Lineslug
Nope, I did not, 'cuz I don't much care for her. But at least she has a track record as a successful and popular State Governor, as opposed to a track record of..... ummm..... ok, so no track record of any kind but a good talker.
(BTW, you might have missed the at the end of my previous post. I don't much care for ANY of the current crop of politicians, just sayin')
Back to the regularly scheduled cargo cutout.
(BTW, you might have missed the
at the end of my previous post. I don't much care for ANY of the current crop of politicians, just sayin')Back to the regularly scheduled cargo cutout.
Palin’s Popularity Declines in Alaska - Washington Wire - WSJ
12-23-2011, 02:10 AM
#46
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Pragmatic1
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.
Palin’s Popularity Declines in Alaska - Washington Wire - WSJ
Palin’s Popularity Declines in Alaska - Washington Wire - WSJ
This isn't a popularity contest, it isn't about politics, it is about individual freedom of choice.
Those that would limit your freedom are in fact limiting your life.
12-23-2011, 10:16 AM
#47
Trust but Verify!!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by Pragmatic1
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.
Palin’s Popularity Declines in Alaska - Washington Wire - WSJ
Palin’s Popularity Declines in Alaska - Washington Wire - WSJ
12-23-2011, 01:18 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by Albief15
Chew on this....
You need to pay me more…..because I work longer hours and fly much more productive and rigorous schedules than those pax pilots…
You need to pay me more….because I work in a much less safe environment than those other pilots and am less insulated from the risks of fatigue and circadian issues… Cargo pilots are working harder than pax pilots at night as we share the same airspace. As we fly over and around each other in the night skies, you can rest comfortably knowing all those UPS pilots and other supplemental operators that are “used to working at night” will be stumbling working on that “second level of safety” that “is not cost effective to fix”. We will have to work even harder to keep our working space safe, and we will. But it will cost you.
You need to provide me better health care, vacation, and benefits…because I will not be as rested, nor will I have the protections afforded our pax brethren, and the toll on my health will be higher at my second level of safety. I am forced to work harder to make sure I am safe, rested and ready, and I will be. That will require a certain amount of time off and the guarantee I can take care of the my health needs—both mental and physical—because it is harder working at this second tier of safety.
You need to provide my family superior insurance and benefits…because I fly cargo that is not always screened (too costly) for security threats, and since we fly lithium batteries and other hazardous cargo routinely that has been proven to be deadly at times to aircraft, we understand that many times in our industry the bottom line trumps safety. It does not, however, trump the requirement to take care of our families. Therefore we require industry leading insurance so we can fly knowing our families will be okay in the event of our demise burning up over the North Pacific or halfway across the Atlantic Ocean.
So—yeah—I agree we are “different” is cargo. We work harder. We make more profit. We have a much more dangerous work environment. Therefore, our compensation going forward has absolutely, positively nothing to do with what else happens on the passenger side of the industry. Their pay, benefits, and concessionary contracts have ZERO to do with us. After all, we are “different”.
And that difference, my friends, makes all of us worth a lot more money…. So, keep your new work rules. But the industry better reach for their wallet, because they just demonstrated to us that this is all about the dollars, not safety. And we speak that language too…
You need to pay me more…..because I work longer hours and fly much more productive and rigorous schedules than those pax pilots…
You need to pay me more….because I work in a much less safe environment than those other pilots and am less insulated from the risks of fatigue and circadian issues… Cargo pilots are working harder than pax pilots at night as we share the same airspace. As we fly over and around each other in the night skies, you can rest comfortably knowing all those UPS pilots and other supplemental operators that are “used to working at night” will be stumbling working on that “second level of safety” that “is not cost effective to fix”. We will have to work even harder to keep our working space safe, and we will. But it will cost you.
You need to provide me better health care, vacation, and benefits…because I will not be as rested, nor will I have the protections afforded our pax brethren, and the toll on my health will be higher at my second level of safety. I am forced to work harder to make sure I am safe, rested and ready, and I will be. That will require a certain amount of time off and the guarantee I can take care of the my health needs—both mental and physical—because it is harder working at this second tier of safety.
You need to provide my family superior insurance and benefits…because I fly cargo that is not always screened (too costly) for security threats, and since we fly lithium batteries and other hazardous cargo routinely that has been proven to be deadly at times to aircraft, we understand that many times in our industry the bottom line trumps safety. It does not, however, trump the requirement to take care of our families. Therefore we require industry leading insurance so we can fly knowing our families will be okay in the event of our demise burning up over the North Pacific or halfway across the Atlantic Ocean.
So—yeah—I agree we are “different” is cargo. We work harder. We make more profit. We have a much more dangerous work environment. Therefore, our compensation going forward has absolutely, positively nothing to do with what else happens on the passenger side of the industry. Their pay, benefits, and concessionary contracts have ZERO to do with us. After all, we are “different”.
And that difference, my friends, makes all of us worth a lot more money…. So, keep your new work rules. But the industry better reach for their wallet, because they just demonstrated to us that this is all about the dollars, not safety. And we speak that language too…
Suggest you repost in the Cargo section, under a non-safety FDX thread title, to get more visibility and more discussion.
They've chosen to make it an economic issue (not a safety issue) ---- so the moderators shouldn't move it (...hint, hint).
In Unity!
12-23-2011, 06:25 PM
#50
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by FreightDawgyDog
Sounds more like spurned lover syndrome then anything else. Doesn't change my present candidate choice from ABO...
I wonder if the fact our Transportation secretary is a republican possibly played a factor in the pro-business decision to exempt the cargo industry from the fatigue rules.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
