FDX--Furlough not possible? Think again...
12-31-2007, 07:18 PM
#151
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,199
...As far as the Company wanting involuntary displacement to an FDA; I am sure they would love it. If that is what they might try to get from the Union, I say no way never, as a matter of principle. It is not right to make a junior guy pack up his life and move overseas to benefit the corporate interest of a company. Especially a company that is rolling in the $$ with a bright future. That would be selling the pilot group out for corporate interests. If they would offer a decent deal, maybe people would bid it....
12-31-2007, 11:12 PM
#152
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: BOHICA
Posts: 21
Furlough a hollow threat?
No, it's not. Just because FedEx has dealt with slight overmanning over the years does not mean the sudden significant overmanning will be allowed.
You really can't be exact here as small changes are inevitable. But the trends are certain. The 727 SO seat has 100 more on the seniority list than the FO seat. You can easily get rid of the 50 bottom guys before anything else is considered (50 of the most senior SO's will probably upgrade to FO in the near future). You have to have a little excess in the SO seat to deal with change, but not 100. Don't even mention the overmanning in the 3 seats over and above that. If you were to raise the BLG 3 to 5 hrs and reduce the excess reserve lines, you could easily get rid of 30 more per seat. CAs could just be left in place, so call it 60 total. There are 40 of the most recent 200 hires in the FO seat, so it is not out of the realm of possibility to furlough the bottom 100-200 guys. This does not consider the overmanning in other aircraft right now. There is no place for the 727 FOs and 727 SOs to go, other than the over 60 guys, since overmanning exists in many seats fleet wide. I believe the kicker is the realization that hiring is not needed for 3 years. That makes a furlough the only way to relieve this overmanning for the next few YEARS. Very enticing for the company. No training events generated by pulling the trigger for the next 3 years.
Don't believe the 3 year estimate? About 5 Airbus temporarily taken out of service waiting or new engines. Accelerated DC10 conversion schedule. 757 program probably delayed. 727 drawdown probably continuing. 150 “newhires” on the property as of Dec 13th. 100-200 retirements per year canceled for the next 2-3 years. I personally think all the seats from new Airbus and MD11s coming are already spoken for by guys on the DC10 and in the back of the Boeing. The overage in the Boeing CA and FO seats will effectively will fill domestic 757 slots.
I believe the no hiring for 3 yrs estimate. Guys going out on medicals and the 777 bid can't overcome the larger trend. We should have been slightly undermanned for the 3 to 2 seat conversion years but instead we are overmanned. It is unusual for the company to do this sort of thing, correct me if I am wrong, so few believed it was happening. But now here we are.
The question now is whether the union and the company will leave the overmanning in place and reduce BLG or attempt to “fix it" with a furlough.
I'm scratching my head why the company is talking about putting newhires into FDA's if a furlough is around the corner. This part does not fit. But the hiring until we are significantly overmannd dosen't fit either. I also have trouble believing the company didn't see this coming. I have too many unanswered questions to have a decent guess on where all this is going.
No, it's not. Just because FedEx has dealt with slight overmanning over the years does not mean the sudden significant overmanning will be allowed.
You really can't be exact here as small changes are inevitable. But the trends are certain. The 727 SO seat has 100 more on the seniority list than the FO seat. You can easily get rid of the 50 bottom guys before anything else is considered (50 of the most senior SO's will probably upgrade to FO in the near future). You have to have a little excess in the SO seat to deal with change, but not 100. Don't even mention the overmanning in the 3 seats over and above that. If you were to raise the BLG 3 to 5 hrs and reduce the excess reserve lines, you could easily get rid of 30 more per seat. CAs could just be left in place, so call it 60 total. There are 40 of the most recent 200 hires in the FO seat, so it is not out of the realm of possibility to furlough the bottom 100-200 guys. This does not consider the overmanning in other aircraft right now. There is no place for the 727 FOs and 727 SOs to go, other than the over 60 guys, since overmanning exists in many seats fleet wide. I believe the kicker is the realization that hiring is not needed for 3 years. That makes a furlough the only way to relieve this overmanning for the next few YEARS. Very enticing for the company. No training events generated by pulling the trigger for the next 3 years.
Don't believe the 3 year estimate? About 5 Airbus temporarily taken out of service waiting or new engines. Accelerated DC10 conversion schedule. 757 program probably delayed. 727 drawdown probably continuing. 150 “newhires” on the property as of Dec 13th. 100-200 retirements per year canceled for the next 2-3 years. I personally think all the seats from new Airbus and MD11s coming are already spoken for by guys on the DC10 and in the back of the Boeing. The overage in the Boeing CA and FO seats will effectively will fill domestic 757 slots.
I believe the no hiring for 3 yrs estimate. Guys going out on medicals and the 777 bid can't overcome the larger trend. We should have been slightly undermanned for the 3 to 2 seat conversion years but instead we are overmanned. It is unusual for the company to do this sort of thing, correct me if I am wrong, so few believed it was happening. But now here we are.
The question now is whether the union and the company will leave the overmanning in place and reduce BLG or attempt to “fix it" with a furlough.
I'm scratching my head why the company is talking about putting newhires into FDA's if a furlough is around the corner. This part does not fit. But the hiring until we are significantly overmannd dosen't fit either. I also have trouble believing the company didn't see this coming. I have too many unanswered questions to have a decent guess on where all this is going.
12-31-2007, 11:19 PM
#153
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Yeah, yeah. I now know I was going down the wrong path. But I still like to look at the facts that surround a situation. I don't like it when folks say "don't worry about it" and tack on some platitude.
Despite how my posts may make it seem otherwise, I am now ready to get behind the MEC and fight any attempt at lowering BLG. Especially with newhires going to FDAs. The threat to furlough may eventually be brought up in an attempt to scare us into lowering BLG. I am ready to blow off that threat and want everyone else to be mentally ready for it too.
It's managements fault they hired too many. We should not have to pay for that error with lowered BLG.
As has been previously noted, FedEx is making good money. Let Fred take the hit of having too many on the seniority list out of his managers' bonuses. Out of his own bonus too.
Despite how my posts may make it seem otherwise, I am now ready to get behind the MEC and fight any attempt at lowering BLG. Especially with newhires going to FDAs. The threat to furlough may eventually be brought up in an attempt to scare us into lowering BLG. I am ready to blow off that threat and want everyone else to be mentally ready for it too.
It's managements fault they hired too many. We should not have to pay for that error with lowered BLG.
As has been previously noted, FedEx is making good money. Let Fred take the hit of having too many on the seniority list out of his managers' bonuses. Out of his own bonus too.
Last edited by Gunter; 12-31-2007 at 11:24 PM.
12-31-2007, 11:35 PM
#154
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: BOHICA
Posts: 21
Yeah, yeah. I now know I was going down the wrong path. But I still like to look at the facts that surround a situation. I don't like it when folks say "don't worry about it" and tack on some platitude.
Despite how my posts may make it seem otherwise, I am now ready to get behind the MEC and fight any attempt at lowering BLG. Especially with newhires going to FDAs. The threat to furlough may eventually be brought up in an attempt to scare us into lowering BLG. I am ready to blow off that threat and want everyone else to be mentally ready for it too.
It's managements fault they hired too many. We should not have to pay for that error with lowered BLG.
As has been previously noted, FedEx is making good money. Let Fred take the hit of having too many on the seniority list out of his managers' bonuses. Out of his own bonus too.
Despite how my posts may make it seem otherwise, I am now ready to get behind the MEC and fight any attempt at lowering BLG. Especially with newhires going to FDAs. The threat to furlough may eventually be brought up in an attempt to scare us into lowering BLG. I am ready to blow off that threat and want everyone else to be mentally ready for it too.
It's managements fault they hired too many. We should not have to pay for that error with lowered BLG.
As has been previously noted, FedEx is making good money. Let Fred take the hit of having too many on the seniority list out of his managers' bonuses. Out of his own bonus too.
Growth has not met projections and we're parking some planes after peak because we don't need the lift. When they went on the crew hiring spree, we had all those new MD-11's coming on board and DC-10-10's coming out of storage and into service as MD-10's, so I don't think the hiring was carelessly done - there was actually a need.
One can not deny that the usual suspects in the global economy are putting on the squeeze and eventually we're going to feel it. That being said, this company is still putting some very fat profits in its back pocket.
01-01-2008, 10:41 AM
#155
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 138
01-01-2008, 12:40 PM
#156
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 777 Multi-tasker
Posts: 712
work... with 36 day's of vacation and 72 hrs in the current sick bank.. and how much you figure is in the big sick bank?
how much productivity are you going to get out of them?
how much productivity are you going to get out of them?
Last edited by jagplt; 01-01-2008 at 04:40 PM.
01-01-2008, 03:17 PM
#158
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 3,717
So now there's a problem with (senior/old) guys taking their earned vacations and using their earned sick time. What are you asking of them, to not use their vacation, and to fly when they're sick, as well as giving all their earned Disability Sick Account hours back to the company? Don't you realize that most of the time when a senior guy calls in sick, or takes a vacation, someone with less seniority will get a (usually) good deal. Or are you just willing to forsake those good deals, in exchange for accusing the senior guys of taking their earned time away from the job? And oh, by the way, after your first year here, you too start the next year with 72 hours in your sick bank.
01-01-2008, 03:26 PM
#160
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 3,717
Yeah, you're probably right. Just got back from the gym and am rather mellow right now, so I thought I'd spin myself up a bit by logging on here. It just ticks me off when guys make those generalizations. But you're right. If it weren't so much fun, I'd probably stop doing it. Sort of like self-abuse....too much fun to stop.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
