FDX 777 Pay issue resolved?
12-17-2008, 09:58 AM
#31
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 48
MM, Feeling a little defensive today? My statement was hardly a " whiney rant". Just describing how a ULR bonus would benefit MEM over ANC. I'm sure the MEM guys have the votes to pass this kind of thing. Remember the FDA LOA? 68%.
12-17-2008, 10:18 AM
#32
Living the dream!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 915
Now if it would pay with three pilots then maybe we'd have a deal. We will get older 777s (with the reduced floor loading) to replace the MD and Airbus fleet. I said it in another post we will be a 777 and 757 fleet in 20 years. We need the 777 to have a stand alone pay rate. IMHO
12-17-2008, 12:49 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 11 Capt
Posts: 509
The idea of a premium for flights like this pays the guys who do the flying. Earlier poster was correct in that the schoolhouse guys will bid pay only lines and get paid widebody rates instead of a separated 777 pay rate. This is quite a bit of savings for the company when you look at pay only lines, vacation, sick, etc. It's not a bad compromise as long as the union makes sure the premiums are already triggered (as the email said). IMHO
1) How can we allow the Company to introduce the largest most efficient freighter we have ever had at WB (read A300) pay rates? What happens when the company buys the next larger A/C (ie 747-8F)? Do we continue to fly these increasingly larger planes for the WB rates? If we bite on this we will lose all leverage with the company for a decent 777 rate because the crewing issues will all be resolved. Unlike now where they will have to operate the 777 with MD crew/duty times.
2) The "trigger" of LRP would be "double crewed" flights. This goes DIRECTLY against what JG said in his letter about "trigger-related" premiums. (Think Scheduled Block Override now) The company controls the trigger in this case again. We do not know how this thing will be scheduled. How do the flt times of the city-pairs work with the inbound/outbound at the hubs? It may be better for the company to hop it to Asia/India and long haul it back. You'll not get paid any extra for hopping around Asia or the middle east/europe just the WB rate. (current MD type flying) Thus leaving half of the flying Credit Hours paying NON-LRP WB (read A300) rates....
3) If this passes, any future pay raises are normally to the Book Rates. So as time goes by this LRP pay will be less and less in a percent of total pay. LRP will have to be raised separately from Book rates as it is similiar to the Intl Override we get now. Of which does not increase when we get our annual 3% raises.... Which means that if we go this route that is something else that has to be "negotiated". With a 777 book rate we only have the one issue-Book Rate. And we will get contractual raises on that the rest of our careers!
4) Doesn't anyone else think it is quite odd that only one meeting after the new NC chair is in place that we have a deal? Reminds me of the dismissal of GS years ago......
I think this needs to go down in a big way. When we get a 777 Book rate then we can continue working on the Crew/Duty limits..... This is a bad deal and will be forever if we vote it in.....
Past...
12-17-2008, 01:25 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,813
I see several issues that are not good about this proposal. I was a math major so bear with me....
1) How can we allow the Company to introduce the largest most efficient freighter we have ever had at WB (read A300) pay rates? What happens when the company buys the next larger A/C (ie 747-8F)? Do we continue to fly these increasingly larger planes for the WB rates? If we bite on this we will lose all leverage with the company for a decent 777 rate because the crewing issues will all be resolved. Unlike now where they will have to operate the 777 with MD crew/duty times.
2) The "trigger" of LRP would be "double crewed" flights. This goes DIRECTLY against what JG said in his letter about "trigger-related" premiums. (Think Scheduled Block Override now) The company controls the trigger in this case again. We do not know how this thing will be scheduled. How do the flt times of the city-pairs work with the inbound/outbound at the hubs? It may be better for the company to hop it to Asia/India and long haul it back. You'll not get paid any extra for hopping around Asia or the middle east/europe just the WB rate. (current MD type flying) Thus leaving half of the flying Credit Hours paying NON-LRP WB (read A300) rates....
3) If this passes, any future pay raises are normally to the Book Rates. So as time goes by this LRP pay will be less and less in a percent of total pay. LRP will have to be raised separately from Book rates as it is similiar to the Intl Override we get now. Of which does not increase when we get our annual 3% raises.... Which means that if we go this route that is something else that has to be "negotiated". With a 777 book rate we only have the one issue-Book Rate. And we will get contractual raises on that the rest of our careers!
4) Doesn't anyone else think it is quite odd that only one meeting after the new NC chair is in place that we have a deal? Reminds me of the dismissal of GS years ago......
I think this needs to go down in a big way. When we get a 777 Book rate then we can continue working on the Crew/Duty limits..... This is a bad deal and will be forever if we vote it in.....
Past...
1) How can we allow the Company to introduce the largest most efficient freighter we have ever had at WB (read A300) pay rates? What happens when the company buys the next larger A/C (ie 747-8F)? Do we continue to fly these increasingly larger planes for the WB rates? If we bite on this we will lose all leverage with the company for a decent 777 rate because the crewing issues will all be resolved. Unlike now where they will have to operate the 777 with MD crew/duty times.
2) The "trigger" of LRP would be "double crewed" flights. This goes DIRECTLY against what JG said in his letter about "trigger-related" premiums. (Think Scheduled Block Override now) The company controls the trigger in this case again. We do not know how this thing will be scheduled. How do the flt times of the city-pairs work with the inbound/outbound at the hubs? It may be better for the company to hop it to Asia/India and long haul it back. You'll not get paid any extra for hopping around Asia or the middle east/europe just the WB rate. (current MD type flying) Thus leaving half of the flying Credit Hours paying NON-LRP WB (read A300) rates....
3) If this passes, any future pay raises are normally to the Book Rates. So as time goes by this LRP pay will be less and less in a percent of total pay. LRP will have to be raised separately from Book rates as it is similiar to the Intl Override we get now. Of which does not increase when we get our annual 3% raises.... Which means that if we go this route that is something else that has to be "negotiated". With a 777 book rate we only have the one issue-Book Rate. And we will get contractual raises on that the rest of our careers!
4) Doesn't anyone else think it is quite odd that only one meeting after the new NC chair is in place that we have a deal? Reminds me of the dismissal of GS years ago......
I think this needs to go down in a big way. When we get a 777 Book rate then we can continue working on the Crew/Duty limits..... This is a bad deal and will be forever if we vote it in.....
Past...
Did I miss something? Did the union publish an LOA for the 777 or did the new NC just say that something is in the works with very few details. Everyone on this board seems ready to vote this down without even reading the thing. Fire, ready, aim.
12-17-2008, 01:27 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 424
I guess I'll have to see the finished product before making a decision, but at first glance, I am not a big fan either. If the company plans on flying this aircraft in the same way as the -380, I expect -380 pay. Not just on certain legs.
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
12-17-2008, 01:44 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 11 Capt
Posts: 509
Lets go with what we have and hope that what comes out is better than some of what we have seen now.
Pinseeker, People voted the HKG LOA IN without reading it...
12-17-2008, 01:53 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
I guess I'll have to see the finished product before making a decision, but at first glance, I am not a big fan either. If the company plans on flying this aircraft in the same way as the -380, I expect -380 pay. Not just on certain legs.
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
12-17-2008, 02:07 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,813
I guess I'll have to see the finished product before making a decision, but at first glance, I am not a big fan either. If the company plans on flying this aircraft in the same way as the -380, I expect -380 pay. Not just on certain legs.
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
I think we made a mistake last contract by getting all of this "hidden money". Has anyone seen a dime from the international grid? I have seen some extra from block over 8. But this isn't ideal since it is based on actual, not scheduled. I, for one, would like to see contract improvements in real gains. Hourly rates, B plan, etc. Real work rule changes that we can actually benefit from.
The company out smarts us everytime. It seems that they need some contract relief to fly the ULR legs (much as we gave them on the -380). I wouldn't give them any relief unless they want to pay the ULR rates. If they choose to arbitrate the pay rates, they may or may not be better off. They will still need work rule concessions to fly ULR routes.
Bottomline: No work rule concessions without -380 pay....
Just playing devils advocate here, but with the limited details we have it looks like they are going to pay higher than 380 rates on ULR routes, including those flown by the 11. The 777 doesn't carry significantly more freight than the 11, it only flies a lot further. If we get an LOA and vote it down simply because it is not a 380 pay scale, what ammo do we have with the arbitrator when the company says the 777 only carries about 15k more freight and they offered us an override for ULR flying, but we turned it down. All of this is speculation, so lets just wait and see what is offered, if anything. Until then, I won't make up my mind one way or the other.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
