FDX - Communications from the NC
01-28-2009, 09:20 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Why do any of you think the union can fix carryover, or even has a say in it? The company can unilaterally fix the carryover today. They don't need the union to do that.
I've heard we are not getting the full story from the Union, if not the company needs to post their official proposals so we can see if we are being lied to by the union. Most of us can read and until the company does that I have a hard time believing the union is not telling the truth.
I've heard we are not getting the full story from the Union, if not the company needs to post their official proposals so we can see if we are being lied to by the union. Most of us can read and until the company does that I have a hard time believing the union is not telling the truth.
After reading JG's message, and actually reading the supporting links, I doubt there is anything else to know. If the company claims they have additional info, bring it forth!
My MEC speaks for me!
01-28-2009, 09:32 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: On the corner, covered in Stickum
Posts: 376
as someone who is in that top 40% i don't want to see a furlough either....i actually enjoy the extra days off....but md10 is right we have no leverage here....the union has to be careful because if they win the grievance after the excess they will probably furlough....this is very complicated....as u may know i am not happy with the leadership right now so i have trouble blindly getting on the side of DW .....in my 14 yrs i feel i have been screwed once by the company with the optimizer which affected 2 months of flying and once by the union with DWs age 65 debacle which cost me 5 years of seniority....i think he may be trying to pump himself up fully knowing that we have no leverage here and then he leaves office on a hi note....then the next guy looks like the bad guy.......seriously everyone is getting all pumped up here....for what?....someone tell me what we can do?....where is our leverage?...it seems if we win the grievance the juniors guys are toast and if we lose the grievance the junior guys are toast also....bottom line is 42ab was a mistake....and of course we did it to ourselves by voting for and ratifying it!.....i would rather see both sides talk more...fix the carryover issue and keep everyone on the property....any thought guys?
Not sure about that. 4.A.2.b must be invoked before any pilot is furloughed. If an arbitrator says it was improperly invoked, the company gets shoved back through a hoop that they needed to jump through to get to a furlough and, also, 4.A.2.b. I would think that at that point their options would be: 1. Buy up lines again.(Expensive) 2. BIG excess and furlough.(Expensive) 3. Approach union again about manning mitigation.(Humbling) Just my impression here.
But how long will it take to win this grievance? The recession might be easing by then and, if we win, we might get back pay. Essentially, we would have given a zero interest loan to the company to get through '09. If the economy doesn't improve......? Well, it would suck to be on the very bottom of the seniority list.
If we lose the grievance? We will need to fix it. How much will that cost us in contract 2010?
Cheers.
01-28-2009, 09:47 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: A300/310 Capt
Posts: 1,642
In listening to the union meeting, I got the impression that this grievance might not get settled for a long time (possibly not before openers). If that is the case, then either the economy will have turned around by then, or a furlough, if warranted, would have already taken place. IMO, if they are going to furlough, then it will have already happened long before a decision on the grievance is reached. If the company loses the grievance, but business has picked up, they won't furlough just for spite.
01-28-2009, 10:10 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
I must respectfully ask you, what other "tangents" would you have suggested ALPA follow??
If you read JG's masterful submission, it is patently obvious that it is the company that is not negotiating in good faith.
It is the company that is seeking to extract dollars from our collective wallets in the form of 4A2B.
They will have an excess, but I predict they won't furlough. Let's remember one thing. It was costing the company a measly 1 million dollars per month to buyup all of the lines. Now that BLG's are sub 62 in some seats, what the average is I don't know, they are probably banking in the neighborhood of 3 million a month savings. That is our money folks. If they furlough, the BLG's snap-back, i.e. no more 3 million a month savings, they lose this crewforce's loyalty, most likely for ever since the junior folks will inherit the farm eventually and we are the ones being trampled on most, and Wall Street will take notice.
Quit questioning the Union, and just follow the CBA. It isn't hard to do.
Convair Out
If you read JG's masterful submission, it is patently obvious that it is the company that is not negotiating in good faith.
It is the company that is seeking to extract dollars from our collective wallets in the form of 4A2B.
They will have an excess, but I predict they won't furlough. Let's remember one thing. It was costing the company a measly 1 million dollars per month to buyup all of the lines. Now that BLG's are sub 62 in some seats, what the average is I don't know, they are probably banking in the neighborhood of 3 million a month savings. That is our money folks. If they furlough, the BLG's snap-back, i.e. no more 3 million a month savings, they lose this crewforce's loyalty, most likely for ever since the junior folks will inherit the farm eventually and we are the ones being trampled on most, and Wall Street will take notice.
Quit questioning the Union, and just follow the CBA. It isn't hard to do.
Convair Out
01-28-2009, 10:12 AM
#55
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 777 CA
Posts: 28
Why do any of you think the union can fix carryover, or even has a say in it? The company can unilaterally fix the carryover today. They don't need the union to do that. Cap and bank system?, yea the union would have to buy off on that. And, I support it right now.
I think the "boy" is right (what, who said that?
). If it makes financial sense to furlough it's going to happen. Personally, I think the threat is being used as a tool by the company to sway the crew force. IMHO the contract is being used as a cost cutting tool and that's not right. We have the contract to guarantee pay.
Man I'll work for 25% pay if it will actually keep guys from getting furloughed, but I don't think that's what's going on here.
So, my official sentiment to the company is:
If you need to furlough do it, because I honestly don't think they will, and I don't want to panic over a threat. Let the grievance run it's course and let the excess do what it will. We can't stop either from happening.
BoyCaptain also thinks Webb is the only player in the Union and all the other volunteers do his bidding. I hope he is wrong we need some good tough guys driving the bus right now. He is also right that we need the Union and the company to be talking.
I've heard we are not getting the full story from the Union, if not the company needs to post their official proposals so we can see if we are being lied to by the union. Most of us can read and until the company does that I have a hard time believing the union is not telling the truth. Black and white proposals is what we need to see.
Lets hope we have great guys on both sides, we are all on the same burning boat!
I think the "boy" is right (what, who said that?
). If it makes financial sense to furlough it's going to happen. Personally, I think the threat is being used as a tool by the company to sway the crew force. IMHO the contract is being used as a cost cutting tool and that's not right. We have the contract to guarantee pay.Man I'll work for 25% pay if it will actually keep guys from getting furloughed, but I don't think that's what's going on here.
So, my official sentiment to the company is:
If you need to furlough do it, because I honestly don't think they will, and I don't want to panic over a threat. Let the grievance run it's course and let the excess do what it will. We can't stop either from happening.
BoyCaptain also thinks Webb is the only player in the Union and all the other volunteers do his bidding. I hope he is wrong we need some good tough guys driving the bus right now. He is also right that we need the Union and the company to be talking.
I've heard we are not getting the full story from the Union, if not the company needs to post their official proposals so we can see if we are being lied to by the union. Most of us can read and until the company does that I have a hard time believing the union is not telling the truth. Black and white proposals is what we need to see.
Lets hope we have great guys on both sides, we are all on the same burning boat!
I agree that we are probably overmanned for the amount of freight we are hauling and the company has the responsibility to cut costs appropriately. Management has an obligation to the shareholders and to the employees. Happy workers make productive workers and productive workers make money in the long run. Management should work to keep employee loyalty high by doing everything possible to prevent a furlough. Management's actions and words to this point do not show they want to save jobs--only cut costs any way they can.
I for one will not let selfish, short-term monetary gains hurt the future of the entire pilot force. Management's job is to put the shareholder's profits ahead of my family's welfare. My job is to put the long term welfare of my family and the family's of my fellow pilots first.
We as a collective pilot force have the power to influence the company's decisions toward a win/win situation. Here is what I, as one pilot, commit to do.
1. Support JG and our NC 100% in order to save jobs and find appropriate cost cutting measures for the company (the golden goose).
2. I will not fly VLT/DRF or use any of my MU time to suck up trips that could be used to make more flying lines for folks that would otherwise appear to be unnecessary to the company.
3. I will protect min days off with every bid period from now on.
4. I will use the extra time at home to strengthen my relationships with my wife and kids. This is the silver lining for all of us.
My actions alone will mean very little. 3000 pilots doing the same thing will keep more Fedex families in their homes with good health care. I can look in the mirror and feel good about what I'm doing. Can you?
01-28-2009, 11:46 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Otherwise, I agree with your MLV/4.A.2.b. theory.
01-28-2009, 12:16 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Depends on reserve utilization and whether or not buy up is in play.
If the reserves are utilized as much as the company wants and there is no buy up, they don't care if one cat makes 130 and another makes 60. They could be more even at 110 and 80, but it doesn't matter. The total pay is still the same...But there is more to this argument.
Keeping a significant portion of the lines below 68 or 65 saves money. It keeps the RLG low so utilization doesn't have to get too high to meet their target of credit vs. hrs flown. The company actually is financially encouraged to create excess carryover to keep next month's BLG low. To get BLG low next month they have to take flying out of next month's lines and put it on this month's lines as carryover. You will eventually be paid for it but it does not contribute to BLG in this month the next. Carryover is extra flying not accounted for anywhere but in the individual's pay summary.
This is besides all the volunteer and draft that is saved in the first week by stuffing it with carryover.
If the reserves are utilized as much as the company wants and there is no buy up, they don't care if one cat makes 130 and another makes 60. They could be more even at 110 and 80, but it doesn't matter. The total pay is still the same...But there is more to this argument.
Keeping a significant portion of the lines below 68 or 65 saves money. It keeps the RLG low so utilization doesn't have to get too high to meet their target of credit vs. hrs flown. The company actually is financially encouraged to create excess carryover to keep next month's BLG low. To get BLG low next month they have to take flying out of next month's lines and put it on this month's lines as carryover. You will eventually be paid for it but it does not contribute to BLG in this month the next. Carryover is extra flying not accounted for anywhere but in the individual's pay summary.
This is besides all the volunteer and draft that is saved in the first week by stuffing it with carryover.
Last edited by Gunter; 01-28-2009 at 12:31 PM.
01-28-2009, 12:37 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Unless the reserve utilization is near 100%...Your argument leaks water.
If the company is paying one guy an extra 72hrs, and another guy to sit on his arse at home, for half of his R-days, for 60...They are wasting their money. Make that "OUR" money.
We've hashed and rehashed whether a loss of carryover hours would be used for new lines(less reserves), or higher BLGs. You figure out which a company would do if they're trying to cut costs. Seems that we've already reduced alot of carryover and I certainly don't see higher BLGs.
If the company is paying one guy an extra 72hrs, and another guy to sit on his arse at home, for half of his R-days, for 60...They are wasting their money. Make that "OUR" money.
We've hashed and rehashed whether a loss of carryover hours would be used for new lines(less reserves), or higher BLGs. You figure out which a company would do if they're trying to cut costs. Seems that we've already reduced alot of carryover and I certainly don't see higher BLGs.
01-28-2009, 12:50 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 138
I had not read JG's email when I posted that. Now that I have I must admit I am more impressed with what they are doing now. The carryover freight train has been coming down the track for years. I can question the union all I want since they did NOTHING about this until 1 month ago. I wrote my union rep about this over a year ago and got the response that carryover can be a "good deal" for those who can game the system. The company is saving up their money now for the big excess where they are going to move people all over the place and then come in with the big finish and furlough if they need to. And all we can do is file a grievance? JG sounds like the right man for the job now and I hope he along with Obama can save us.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
