Not so fast on the return to 'Cargo'
12-04-2007, 07:36 PM
#11
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD-11, F/O
Posts: 889
I think it's appropriate to mention and focus on 2 facts:
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
12-04-2007, 07:49 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
I think it's appropriate to mention and focus on 2 facts:
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
12-04-2007, 08:03 PM
#13
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 47
Talking with a lot of ANC and LAX crews it sounded that most of the pilots based in those two locations were against the LOA. My question is why did your Block Rep vote for it if most of the domicile was against it? If you can't listen to your crew force and vote for what THEY want, they shouldn't be our ELECTED representative! I am tired of hearing I am voting for what "I" want and now what my people want. These guys need to wake up. 3 or 4 should have been the number that voted against the LOA, not just 1. I know that would still be a losing vote, but might have given some of the others balls to call the LOA what it really is. Only a bottom feeders opinion.
12-04-2007, 09:23 PM
#15
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: MD11
Posts: 49
What did FE pay you? 
Cheers,
Sparkmo
Cheers,
Sparkmo
I think it's appropriate to mention and focus on 2 facts:
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
1. BC is no longer our NCC. We have a new one, FE. From personal experience I can tell you he is up to the task. In addition I am confident the team he will put together will be skilled, prepared and well aquainted with the issues.
2. We must learn from the past, but let it go in favor providing the best opportunity to make gains in the future. We will never get the "pound of flesh" for any perceived past failures. Now that our leverage of not bidding FDA's under a sub-standard LOA has yielded a new opportunity to make the enviornment better, lets focus on that un-waveringly and concertedly until an agreement we approve of is reached.
No distractions.....no blinking.......
P.S. Realistic colation and presentation of the FDA "facts of Life and living" is the place to start IMHO
12-05-2007, 02:44 AM
#16
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
It would be interesting to see just how much "negotiating" will be conducted. Any bets as to the side letter reading exactly what the company offered in their direct communications with us?
Here's an opportunity to fix at least a few of the low/no-cost items. How about some parameters assigned to the CAN/HKG GT? Such as:
-Pickup/dropoff at crewmembers dwelling-small cost to the company-HUGE difference in crew fatigue and housing location choice for "affordable" places;
-Limits to how many >2.0 hours GT in a given day/week/month/whatever, but something other than just a blanket waiver.
-Specified type of vehicle for CAN-HKG G/T.
-A bank amount established for G/T >2.0 hours?
-How about a leg-limit following the CAN-HKG GT? Block hour limit? Duty limit? (A 3-4 hour GT with a Chinese driver is decidedly more fatiguing than the same amount of block time, especially with no restrictions set on type of vehicle...think about that ICN van ride and triple it!).
-Provide G/T for those who live in the CAN area (one would think the company could see the win/win both sides could realize in giving a little incentive for some to live close to the airport).
-Up the housing allowance (yeah right), Okay maybe not, but how about eliminating the words "up to" and just come clean with the cash and let those spend it as they wish?
-How about a little fight for Tax Protection vs Tax Equalization. This would be a big incentive for getting junior guys to fill those empty seats. This would have a negligible effect on the company bottom line, but a HUGE effect on many individuals.
-How about getting the company to provide some relocation assistance to those who choose to live in CAN? Cartus currently refuses such assistance. Certainly there is a mechanism set up for the mgt folks who will be going there.
-How about a minimum number of sleep rooms established based on number of hubturns/long-GT-then-fly scheduled? We're told there will be 16 rooms=8 crews.....anyone think this will be enough?
-How about making any side letter contingent on a defininitive G/T plan being established. How about making that GT plan contractual?
-How about some hundred-pound shipments like the ones currently in place in Subic? No cost to the company...in fact, I believe it's a write-off. Duty costs too high? Have the crewmember split it, perhaps. I've been to Hong Kong grocery stores...even their best have limited western supplies, if not old/stale/expensive. Family back home wants to ship XMAS presents to their loved ones in HKG under current provisions? Better make them able to fit in an envelope. The G.I. Joe for the HKG-based crewmembers' "personal choice" from the Grandparents is pretty much cost-prohibitive without a little help from the global shipping company employer.
These are just a few low-cost/no-cost things that should have been covered last spring that were blown off. Let's challenge our new negotiating chair to at least try and get some decent language written into the LOA for items that don't choke the golden chicken (okay, goose) but can make a huge difference on an individual basis in QOL. It's also in the company's best interest to have people not want to just bug out of there at the first opportunity. Make it a little more liveable and maybe some folks will actually stick around out there.
Okay, hand me the bottle, I'm ready to pee in it.... I must be out of my mind to even suggest anything such as the above.
BGY-Disingenuous Proponent of Hysteria
Here's an opportunity to fix at least a few of the low/no-cost items. How about some parameters assigned to the CAN/HKG GT? Such as:
-Pickup/dropoff at crewmembers dwelling-small cost to the company-HUGE difference in crew fatigue and housing location choice for "affordable" places;
-Limits to how many >2.0 hours GT in a given day/week/month/whatever, but something other than just a blanket waiver.
-Specified type of vehicle for CAN-HKG G/T.
-A bank amount established for G/T >2.0 hours?
-How about a leg-limit following the CAN-HKG GT? Block hour limit? Duty limit? (A 3-4 hour GT with a Chinese driver is decidedly more fatiguing than the same amount of block time, especially with no restrictions set on type of vehicle...think about that ICN van ride and triple it!).
-Provide G/T for those who live in the CAN area (one would think the company could see the win/win both sides could realize in giving a little incentive for some to live close to the airport).
-Up the housing allowance (yeah right), Okay maybe not, but how about eliminating the words "up to" and just come clean with the cash and let those spend it as they wish?
-How about a little fight for Tax Protection vs Tax Equalization. This would be a big incentive for getting junior guys to fill those empty seats. This would have a negligible effect on the company bottom line, but a HUGE effect on many individuals.
-How about getting the company to provide some relocation assistance to those who choose to live in CAN? Cartus currently refuses such assistance. Certainly there is a mechanism set up for the mgt folks who will be going there.
-How about a minimum number of sleep rooms established based on number of hubturns/long-GT-then-fly scheduled? We're told there will be 16 rooms=8 crews.....anyone think this will be enough?
-How about making any side letter contingent on a defininitive G/T plan being established. How about making that GT plan contractual?
-How about some hundred-pound shipments like the ones currently in place in Subic? No cost to the company...in fact, I believe it's a write-off. Duty costs too high? Have the crewmember split it, perhaps. I've been to Hong Kong grocery stores...even their best have limited western supplies, if not old/stale/expensive. Family back home wants to ship XMAS presents to their loved ones in HKG under current provisions? Better make them able to fit in an envelope. The G.I. Joe for the HKG-based crewmembers' "personal choice" from the Grandparents is pretty much cost-prohibitive without a little help from the global shipping company employer.
These are just a few low-cost/no-cost things that should have been covered last spring that were blown off. Let's challenge our new negotiating chair to at least try and get some decent language written into the LOA for items that don't choke the golden chicken (okay, goose) but can make a huge difference on an individual basis in QOL. It's also in the company's best interest to have people not want to just bug out of there at the first opportunity. Make it a little more liveable and maybe some folks will actually stick around out there.
Okay, hand me the bottle, I'm ready to pee in it.... I must be out of my mind to even suggest anything such as the above.
BGY-Disingenuous Proponent of Hysteria
Shut up, and go to your room!
12-05-2007, 02:53 AM
#17
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
My prediction would be that the exact same things that have been offered unilaterally by the company are going to be what the side letter is about, nothing more. If anything else is offered that differs from what we have, I would think that the whole bid would have to be re-done. I think negotiations might not be the correct term.
This all has been precipitated, I feel, by a letter from a crew member, a grievance submitted, and a resolution passes by the SFS group.
This all has been precipitated, I feel, by a letter from a crew member, a grievance submitted, and a resolution passes by the SFS group.
12-05-2007, 02:55 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: let it snow, let it snow, let it snow
Posts: 833
greivance status????
??????????????????????
My prediction would be that the exact same things that have been offered unilaterally by the company are going to be what the side letter is about, nothing more. If anything else is offered that differs from what we have, I would think that the whole bid would have to be re-done. I think negotiations might not be the correct term.
This all has been precipitated, I feel, by a letter from a crew member, a grievance submitted, and a resolution passes by the SFS group.
This all has been precipitated, I feel, by a letter from a crew member, a grievance submitted, and a resolution passes by the SFS group.
12-05-2007, 03:04 AM
#19
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
The status is that the crew member who filed the grievance was told yesterday by telephone that discussions have taken place within the Union concerning the grievance, and that a meeting of the Union leaders was to be scheduled in the near future. 20 hours or so later, the MEC tells us about the meeting on the 6th with the Company.
12-05-2007, 03:16 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: let it snow, let it snow, let it snow
Posts: 833
The status is that the crew member who filed the grievance was told yesterday by telephone that discussions have taken place within the Union concerning the grievance, and that a meeting of the Union leaders was to be scheduled in the near future. 20 hours or so later, the MEC tells us about the meeting on the 6th with the Company.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
