FDX Neg. Chairman Fired
10-26-2008, 06:04 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Now you've done it ... we might have to recall your APC membership for this line of thinking. Totally unsat giving the FH positive reinforcement for any of his scatter-brained ideas
10-26-2008, 06:18 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
It pains me to say this but Foxhunter was right. Had we stayed with FPA, the current union leadership would have been gone many moons ago. Now, I'm personally pro-ALPA but in our case, the foxes are in the chicken coop and we can't get them out. (So we need a Foxhunter?). When FPA first came into being, we had three block reps who got that DW attitude and were promptly recalled by the members of their block. Gone, toast, sayonara! We had some growing pains but after a short while we had a darn fine group who either represented their block or were one vote away from night hub turns. The problem with ALPA is that when you get bad actors in the leadership positions, they're like federal judges, it's almost impossible to get rid of them. DW is well aware that in a straight up vote of confidence, he'd poll the same kind of numbers Ralph Nader is looking at but he could care less. Just pass the Dom Perignon buddy and fire up a Cubano! Foxhunter, ahem, er, stammer.....you were right!
And please, don't whine about proxies not being accepted, or the block reps having more proxies of their own...The outcome of the last recall was something like 23 to 9. That's out of, what, 350-400 possible voters?
Even at FH's beloved FPA, that wouldn't have cut the mustard.
10-26-2008, 07:36 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: ANC-Based MD-11 FO
Posts: 328
I think a better strategy at this point than recalling DW for the reasons already mentioned, is to wait and see who he appoints as FE's replacement. If that person is a tough, union guy, then let's give them a chance. However, if the replacement is less aggressive or otherwise weaker than Fred, then we recall that person.
I think we'll gain nothing, waste emotional energy and even enhance DW's position and support if we try and fail to recall him. I say let age take its natural course and attrite him out. Focus on who the new NC chair will be.
I think we'll gain nothing, waste emotional energy and even enhance DW's position and support if we try and fail to recall him. I say let age take its natural course and attrite him out. Focus on who the new NC chair will be.
10-26-2008, 08:19 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 357
600 people eliminates 64% of the S/O's in the 72 (203 of 315).
600 people eliminates 37% of the F/O's in the 72 (103 of 280).
600 people eliminates 71% of the F/O's in the Bus in HKG (10 of 14).
600 people eliminates 50% of the F/O's in the 11 in ANC (117 of 234).
600 people eliminates 37% of the F/O's in the 72 (103 of 280).
600 people eliminates 71% of the F/O's in the Bus in HKG (10 of 14).
600 people eliminates 50% of the F/O's in the 11 in ANC (117 of 234).
So add to the above:
b. The minimum bid period guarantee shall be reduced to a minimum of 48/60
CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the
announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent
or delay a furlough.
How does one run the company with a 30% reduction in hours and a 25% reduction in the crew force.
CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the
announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent
or delay a furlough.
How does one run the company with a 30% reduction in hours and a 25% reduction in the crew force.
10-26-2008, 08:21 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Heavily Involved
Posts: 473
I agree JJ, they are guesses. I do not mean to construe them as truths. I am just searching for a reasonable explanation and throwing my reasoning out there. If for nothing else, than to get other people's hypothesis as well.
10-26-2008, 08:24 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Heavily Involved
Posts: 473
So add to the above:
b. The minimum bid period guarantee shall be reduced to a minimum of 48/60
CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the
announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent
or delay a furlough.
How does one run the company with a 30% reduction in hours and a 25% reduction in the crew force.
CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the
announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent
or delay a furlough.
How does one run the company with a 30% reduction in hours and a 25% reduction in the crew force.
It's more plausible to look at the financial impact a furlough would have on the company IMO as the main deterrent to a furlough.
10-26-2008, 08:43 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: On the corner, covered in Stickum
Posts: 376
Again, shaky wording in our contract. Question, what would prohibit the company from lowering BLG's one month, say in the summer...then immediately raising them back the next month and from then on. They would meet the provisions in this section of the contract, post uncovered flying in OT, then snap it right back to regular BLG's.
It's more plausible to look at the financial impact a furlough would have on the company IMO as the main deterrent to a furlough.
It's more plausible to look at the financial impact a furlough would have on the company IMO as the main deterrent to a furlough.
Convair is correct. As far as I can see, only one month of reduced BLGs is required.
10-26-2008, 10:00 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: On the corner, covered in Stickum
Posts: 376
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
