This is very true. There is some scarey stuff in this LOA about your financial responsibility to the company if things don't work out for you and your family over there. Pack up and move home on your own nickel along with pay back of the company "seed money" and all storage costs for your HHG's..This would not be so bad if there was a real COLA in this LOA but there is not. It is completely inadequate. That being the case you had better make sure ahead of time that you and your family can afford to sell your home and move over there without being financially destroyed. Does not give me a warm and fuzzy.

If you listen to the MEC no one can afford to bid the FDAs because they will be obligated for US and commie pinko taxes if the LOA goes down. I for one am willing to see that happen. Call their bluff and vote no. That is the only way to strengthen our hand for the next contract.

Again--I haven't heard one guy say "I WANT to go to Paris/HKG and I WANT you guys to vote for it..."

Until someone explains why they want me to help them by voting this in, I'll vote no. If the company doesn't offer something better down the road, so be it. I don't think the company will get the experience they want with this LOA, and they certainly won't get it with no improvements over the CBA provisions. If they want to revert to temp duty assignments--that's their option. But I think voting yes--despite our union's attempts to improve the package--really are condeming the guys overseas to a pretty bad deal.

No bid until we solve this? (yawn). I can wait.

I'm 29, single, and have been with the company just over 2 years. I considered a move to HKG before there was talk of a HKG FDA. That being said, I WANT to go to HKG but I can't, in good conscience, WANT you guys to vote for it.

This FDA would probably work for a guy like me, but we have to consider the ramifications of a ratifying vote on a larger scale than personal affordability.

I'm a NO vote now, but I'm holding on a final call until after two events: One is the Council 79 conference call. The other is an 11 day Asia trip, where the real issues can be discussed with other line guys in such fine establishment as Vasco's, Jet Lag, Papa's, Stag's Head, etc. We all know that is where the real debating is done.

Phlyer

Has anyone gone and looked at what the housing would be like in HKG? Or is everyone stuck on the cost of "executive" housing there?

I'm sure someone on a long layover could get some info.

Past...

I had a layover in Hong Kong Monday night, 25 Jun 2007. Went to see my childhood friend that is a lawyer in Hong Kong. He's lived there since 1997. He's lived in three apartments since. I was invited over for dinner and to see his new place. Overlooking Repulse Bay on the south side of Hong Kong island he and his wife rent about 2800 sq ft. I am not sure what he pays in rent. Didn't ask. But, he told me the place was worth $4,000,000.00. That's FOUR MILLION US DOLLARS. I estimate it's worth about $10,000 to $12,000 per month. His law firm covers $6000 to $7000 per month, I believe.

One of our pilots in Subic lives in Hong Kong. We really do have a good idea what the costs are in Hong Kong. Can't speak to Paris though. This LOA is tremendously inadequate. Actually, it's embarrassing.

It was an interesting union meeting last night.....The MEC did a good job of explaining the LOA and why they thought is was good. They didn't say great. They were the first ones to say that they wanted more money. The short version is.....who do you want to do our international flying? This LOA doesn't need to pass to open these bases. They can just open them and have a bid. No extra money at all. They tried to tell everyone not to bid Subic when it opened.....it didn't work. Guys bid it anyway. Do you really think that our pilot group won't bid a base or take an upgrade just because DW says so? We can't even fix the *********$ that pick up disputed pairings in the first few minutes of open time. I think they are right that the "Just don't bid the base thing" won't work. There was a great deal of talk about international law and the question of if the RLA is still a valid law in these bases. DW made a point of saying that this LOA puts the RLA in play in both of these bases.....something we didn't get when Subic opened. That was a done via a lawsuit that was settled out of court....so it is still an open ended legal question of if the RLA applies or not. This LOA makes that happen. I could type more, but that am out / back has just about killed me.
Before anyone decides to vote yes or no, I would encourage you actually go to a meeting and get involved. I walked into the meeting a definite no and now I'm on the fence. BTW, I walked out of the ALPA meeting to a room of pilots wearing their pin but couldn't take the time to walk 50 feet and sit down and listen to the MEC present this thing....unsat

If we pass this LOA some guys will be more willing to bid it then if we don't pass it. Who do I want to do our international flying? Any member on the senority list that wants to bid it. 90% will not be able to afford it if this LOA passes. I want senority to be representative of the senority list.

If this LOA passes it will be the language in the next contract unless we spen a buttocksload of so called negotiating capital to change it. Negotiating capital that can be better spent elsewhere.

You don't take a financial hit at subic. ANybody that wants to can afford to go there.

I would encourage the MEC to hold better advertised meetings and publish minutes. Are they afraid to go on the record? How about a day hubturn meeting?

They also said that the company wanted the RLA to play in (because of Socialist France being pro-labor, and US residents being able to take FedEx to court in France over labor law issues and most likely winning every time).

Surely the guys at fedex corp that made this offer have got to be joking. I think they are testing the water for the next contract to see just how low we will go. If we cant take a stand on this issue, then when can we.