Its Official; we are doomed
12-31-2008, 06:36 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 11 Left Side
Posts: 100
With the MBPG reduction that was "supposed" by the company (as per the neg. comm. chairman's message) of 58 CH for 4 week, etc., (ie not using the 48/60 mins as "unrealistic" for now) and using ALL the members on the seniority list (4679), the amount of man-hours saved per year would leave a surplus of 14 pilots with the reductions. ( ie reduction to 58 CH MBPG; not accounting for sick, mil, more downturn, more "upturn", everyone flying equivalent hours, no hurricanes, ice storms, etc etc)
I'm with ya, thanks.
12-31-2008, 06:37 PM
#22
New Hire
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Posts: 2
What?
Ok, so let me understand this. If we furlough 700 pilots, what will be the cost to replace the 125 ACN FO's affected, the 20+ HKN FO's affected, and the 64 MEM MD11 FO's affected. Not to mention the ANC and HKG move packages. I must not have the big picture. Can you help me?
12-31-2008, 06:38 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 204
What was the old brain bag sticker? "Fly till you die?" We need a new one for our "buddies" - "Fly till we furlough."
Overheard an over 60 guy looking to roll into the 727 back seat at 65 (on a 0130 hub turn). What is the cost savings/pilot of guys croaking in their hotel room and never picking up a retirement check? Or will the company deposit his survivor benefit into the National Bank of Campenas for disbursal?
Overheard an over 60 guy looking to roll into the 727 back seat at 65 (on a 0130 hub turn). What is the cost savings/pilot of guys croaking in their hotel room and never picking up a retirement check? Or will the company deposit his survivor benefit into the National Bank of Campenas for disbursal?
12-31-2008, 07:09 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Still nothing from the union about carry over bidding (guys protecting it and flying 120 hour lines...). Protecting the senior guys is what this comes down to. If this was stopped now at least half of the problem would be taken care of.
12-31-2008, 07:14 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: MD11 Kitchen Bi*ch
Posts: 263
Overmanning issue
The issue here is truly an emotional one that affects every pilot at FedEx and probably many other airlines as well. I'll limit my comments to FedEx issues exclusively though.
In better economic times, we left ourselves open for more "interpretation" by the company regarding downsizing. Put the blame on the economy that was carrying us on the crest of the wave or on our overwhelming attempts to benefit the senior pilot group by focusing on retirement issues that the majority of the membership did not rate high on the list of things to be worked. Put the blame on ourselves for voting for DW.
When polled, the membership did not support the over 60 issue. Yet DW saw that the uninformed pilot group had made a critical mistake and he corrected our error.
When you look at the numbers that Capt Cassel put out regarding the anticipated retirements, you can clearly see that the "traditional" retirement rate (before the old fogey law was passed...) could have relieved us of nearly 1/3 of the stated overage simply by not hiring. But DW saw the error of our ways and correct it for us.
When you look at the over/under issue, there is a manning issue that raises it's head there also. Wouldn't be a factor if the old fogey law had not passed. But DW saw the error of our ways and voted to support ALPA's efforts to get the law passed.
So when you're sitting in your seat and the old guy stows his walker, just remember that he's made the decision to get his and the heck with the rest of us. Just like those that chose to fly a few years back and purchase red Corvettes as the rest of us toed the line. How can the old fogeys complain about those red Corvettes now????????
In better economic times, we left ourselves open for more "interpretation" by the company regarding downsizing. Put the blame on the economy that was carrying us on the crest of the wave or on our overwhelming attempts to benefit the senior pilot group by focusing on retirement issues that the majority of the membership did not rate high on the list of things to be worked. Put the blame on ourselves for voting for DW.
When polled, the membership did not support the over 60 issue. Yet DW saw that the uninformed pilot group had made a critical mistake and he corrected our error.
When you look at the numbers that Capt Cassel put out regarding the anticipated retirements, you can clearly see that the "traditional" retirement rate (before the old fogey law was passed...) could have relieved us of nearly 1/3 of the stated overage simply by not hiring. But DW saw the error of our ways and correct it for us.
When you look at the over/under issue, there is a manning issue that raises it's head there also. Wouldn't be a factor if the old fogey law had not passed. But DW saw the error of our ways and voted to support ALPA's efforts to get the law passed.
So when you're sitting in your seat and the old guy stows his walker, just remember that he's made the decision to get his and the heck with the rest of us. Just like those that chose to fly a few years back and purchase red Corvettes as the rest of us toed the line. How can the old fogeys complain about those red Corvettes now????????
12-31-2008, 07:16 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: FedEx Capt
Posts: 292
As the C/O thing is just another thing to keep us mad at each other instead of at the company for pitting us against each other.
12-31-2008, 07:20 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 11 Left Side
Posts: 100
What was the old brain bag sticker? "Fly till you die?" We need a new one for our "buddies" - "Fly till we furlough."
Overheard an over 60 guy looking to roll into the 727 back seat at 65 (on a 0130 hub turn). What is the cost savings/pilot of guys croaking in their hotel room and never picking up a retirement check? Or will the company deposit his survivor benefit into the National Bank of Campenas for disbursal?
Overheard an over 60 guy looking to roll into the 727 back seat at 65 (on a 0130 hub turn). What is the cost savings/pilot of guys croaking in their hotel room and never picking up a retirement check? Or will the company deposit his survivor benefit into the National Bank of Campenas for disbursal?
Not sure where the following (from the CBA) was lost in the translation wrt to our current crop of "experienced" pilotos who are now being treated fairly is concerned.
I always wondered how guys were allowed to go to the back of the 10 and 727 when there were no vacancies (ie. it was properly staffed). In any event, the altruism should be nearing the end of it's useful life by now.
23.A.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 23.A.1. and B.1., the
following apply to a pilot subject to a regulated age restriction:
I always wondered how guys were allowed to go to the back of the 10 and 727 when there were no vacancies (ie. it was properly staffed). In any event, the altruism should be nearing the end of it's useful life by now.
23.A.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 23.A.1. and B.1., the
following apply to a pilot subject to a regulated age restriction:
23.A.2c. A restricted pilot who cannot move to or be accommodated
as a second of
ficer from another crew position because
his relative seniority is less than the current population of
his relative seniority is less than the current population of
second officers or there are no second officer crew seats,
shall be offered the opportunity to retire as provided in
the Agreement. Following a pilot’s rejection of the offer,
the pilot shall be released from employment as provided
in Section 22.B.1., and shall not be considered as having
been furloughed in cases where the only crew status the
pilot can occupy is second of
the Agreement. Following a pilot’s rejection of the offer,
the pilot shall be released from employment as provided
in Section 22.B.1., and shall not be considered as having
been furloughed in cases where the only crew status the
pilot can occupy is second of
ficer.
12-31-2008, 07:39 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
The union wants to work an agreement to limit this stuff but the company says no. There is no reason to be mad at each other about this.
The company has their fangs out and they want blood....
12-31-2008, 08:24 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
The problem is there is no "fair and equitable C/O." Only the senior guys can work that system. So they will gobble them up and still have 100 hr + lines and the rest of us working stiffs will slugg it out on the 48 hr lines. Do away with it all or this is a no go in my book. As long as there are lines out there with more that a couple days of carry over it is a show stopper. There are some pairings that always require some carry over but it is ridiculous right now. I have 7 days of carryover they gave me on a VTO in Jan, and PC wants to cut us in Feb? Not even close to "fair and equitable" the way the bid pack is written right now.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
