FDXFLYR

They've been telling us a HUGE bid is coming, 200+ captain slots, just wait, stand by, get your rose-colored glasses on because the world is going to be a wonderful place, etc, etc.

Well the bid came out and look, just 24 MD-11 captain slots and just at MEM.

I glad for that, but come on! Cut the hype already. It's all just happy-talk.

TonyC

The FCIF also states that the 24 MD-11 Captains will train in April and May... Apparently The Company is planning on the cooperation, or "mutual consent," of those awarded slots to train in the month awarded (April) since The Agreement does not require them to train immediately. In other words, The Company cannot post the vacancy award on the 14th of April and assign a Training Date the following Monday (the 17th). However, it is possible (and I would go so far as to say likely) that a few "lucky" folks will receive phone calls on Friday afternoon asking if they'd like to start "early," as in, "next Monday."


Wouldn't it be nice if those "lucky" ladies and/or gentlemen responded to those offers like Draft trips or vacation cancellations?





Now, I suppose if they really got their ducks lined up and actually published the awards on the 14th (never happened before -- published the same day it closes?!?! HA!) that they could push for a start date of the 21st, but I think it's more likely the bid awards would be published on the following Monday (17th) and the earliest they could start would be the 24th. Since that's in the same bid month, I'm not quite sure how that would work, anyway.


Here's the bottom line - - it's just another example of the Company's shortsighted approach to manning. Whether it's planned or not, don't let it take your focus off what's important. (Personally, I think you're giving them too much credit if you think it's an evil plan to distract us. I think it's just incompetance. ) Two years is too long!




- The truth only hurts if it should -

fecav8r

How about asking someone from the Union why this bid hasn't come out before now. The company wanted to give the guys going to Anc a move package and we said we weren't interested. Who does that screw? Them or us?

Nightflyer

Speaking of ANC move packages, there is an LOA from the Union regarding this in your email. However, I have a problem with it.

Tell me one good reason why I should vote yes to the LOA, instead of with holding my approval until I have a contract to vote on?

I say vote the LOA down by a large percentage, and send the message that we want a NEW contract, not an LOA to the OLD one.

TWO YEARS IS TOO LONG!!!!! VOTE NO ON THE LOA!!!

fecav8r

You don't think if hte company out out a bid right now without a move package there wouldn't be guys still going to Anc? All this does is help them and some others out. How does it hurt the company?

RedeyeAV8r

To Nightflyer
Whoa big Fella...............This LOA was negotiated by YOUR negotiating committee. While I haven't seen the actual language it sounds like it is a move forward. We do not currently have a relocation package to ANC.......................Now we might (assuming it passes) and that is benefit ( A Good One) we currently do not have.

Before you start pounding your chest..........Give YOUR negotiating committee the benefit of the doubt. Read the LOA when it is sent to you before you just say NO.

I am as Frustrated with MGT concerning negotiations as you are.
But voting NO just to make a statement when this LOA was negotiated by YOUR NC (especially if they endorse it)........will send a signal to MGT of "No confidence" in ALPA's negotiating committee.

Read it,look at the merits of it..........and if you truely don't think it is a net gain in a benefit........then by all means vote your conscience. Until then.......take a breath and count to ten.

Fraternally

captain_drew

You would have to be a blithering IDIOT to vote 'yes' on that LOA. . !!!

You should be withholding ALL support and 'help' for management. .UNTIL such time as they start acting in good faith!

BTW . . 'my' Negotiating Committee gave us that piece of crap, 5 year contract I retired under! Sometimes you wonder if these guys get a case of "Stockholm Syndrome" from being in that box, under extreme pressure for so long. Management knows what it is doing, stretching out things for so long. HELL . . they are paying tens of millions of corporate bottom line profit to anti-labor attorneys, right?

FoxHunter

Capt. Drew:

Are you not the one that was handing out that good advice back in 98',99',00' telling the younger guys to get out of FedEx and get a good airline job like UAL, American, Delta?

I see the quality of your judgement has not changed with your advancing years.

captain_drew

I think you might have me confused with some other curmudgeon. If I had said anything like that, it was probably to really junior people who were not acting like good union people . .with the indirect effect of making management give us a better contract than we ultimately ended up with.

RedeyeAV8r

Drew With all due respect, Your retirement (that you are hopefully enjoying) is FAR better under that "Piece of S##t" contract than it would have been under the FCH. Could our current contract have been better......you bet!

The retirement section of our current agreement was on PAR or better than most of the Big 5 back in 1998..............and that was before all the turmoil began.

MY point was this LOA was negotiated. The MEC rejected the first company offer one a month or so ago. They managed to get a better one, although I haven't seen it in writing yet.

Flat out just voting NO just to prove a point, especially if it proves to be a Plus for the Pilots?

Whats the Point?

I suppose we could also say we should Flat out VOTE NO on the Next TA that comes our way.

As for me Personally if our Negotiating committe says they endorse it.............I feel we owe it to them to alleast read it before we decide Yes or NO. If our negotiating committee rejected it.........that is good enough for me.