A Letter to FDX ALPA Officers
03-13-2009, 08:46 PM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Hey, didn't you read all the other flames. I've got mine and not in trouble, so I don't need to sell my house. Were you trying to tell Auger In to sell his house because he's in trouble? Heck, while were at it, let's go after retiree payments. They got to reap the benefits of the good years, so lets make them pay for the bad.
Or are you pushing the social agenda that all should suffer? That's the Obama policy and I don't subscribe to it. You can have it, but I am opposed to socialism and income redistribution. I don't agree to using my taxes to bail out someone from a mortgage they shouldn't have taken out in the first place. I don't agree with my taxes going to over 8000 earmarks. So if he's your guy, so be it. But he's not my guy and I don't believe in any of his philosophy's at all (guns, taxes, wealth, income redistribution, or estate taxes to name a few). We'll see in 4 years who was right.
Or are you pushing the social agenda that all should suffer? That's the Obama policy and I don't subscribe to it. You can have it, but I am opposed to socialism and income redistribution. I don't agree to using my taxes to bail out someone from a mortgage they shouldn't have taken out in the first place. I don't agree with my taxes going to over 8000 earmarks. So if he's your guy, so be it. But he's not my guy and I don't believe in any of his philosophy's at all (guns, taxes, wealth, income redistribution, or estate taxes to name a few). We'll see in 4 years who was right.
Maybe I missed it...Did you ever admit you were wrong about the mortgage interest deduction elimination you were talking about?
03-13-2009, 11:32 PM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Z F/O
Posts: 213
No, the lines are being built based on perceived manning per seat. Most are being built to around 60 hours in a 68 hour month. Some are built over 68 hours. Hong Kong bus guys and Mem 757 guys are working 74 hours + in a 68 hour month.
The reserve and training guys are the ones getting hosed. They get paid 96% Blg for the seat but still have to work 15 days a month. So a reserve guy (seat dependent) is getting less than 4 hrs pay per day when the historic average is 4:30.
We still have senior lines that pay 80+ hours in a 68 hour month due to our assanine carry over system. So some guys are feeling no pain yet.
The reserve and training guys are the ones getting hosed. They get paid 96% Blg for the seat but still have to work 15 days a month. So a reserve guy (seat dependent) is getting less than 4 hrs pay per day when the historic average is 4:30.
We still have senior lines that pay 80+ hours in a 68 hour month due to our assanine carry over system. So some guys are feeling no pain yet.
Thanks a bunch for clarifying (and responding when noone else would take 2 minutes to do it).
03-14-2009, 06:29 AM
#75
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 133
The natives are getting restless, what's wrong with this thread, not defending it, but its all about opinions and discussions regarding contentious issues. Why close it, again, you vocal few think you represent the majority, me thinks not. Lots of lurkers here who laff their A$$es off at the vitriol on this board.
03-14-2009, 07:23 AM
#76
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Social Conservative
Posts: 56
My point that something is most likely coming, regardless of the entry point. Your point is....what?
03-14-2009, 07:35 AM
#77
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Social Conservative
Posts: 56
I don't see any posts at all about those not sharing in the pain, about those picking up disputed pairings, about the extra income a select few are making. Rant all you want at me, but nothing you say or do is going to change the situation we are in right now. If you want to change it, you have to contact the union, and that was the purpose of the post.
And anyone that says they came to work at FedEx planning on making less than $100K and budgeting for retirement based upon that is lying. You can get all high and mighty regarding your pay, but saying you'd sacrifice your family and your future is something I can't accept.
I've been with several companies, and each case when the company downsized (realigned, furloughed, whatever), those let go did not ask the other remaining employees to carry them on the payroll. We bit the bullet and moved on. There is nothing in the Constitution that says you will always be employed and I guess the older generation accepts that. It was no fun selling my house at a loss or moving on, but it was a fact of life. It is today for many (auto workers for one). I don't see them asking other employees to take care of them.
But then "change is coming" and maybe this is the new economic era where we bail everyone out and share equally. Heck, Russia did it with the communes and China does it somewhat today. Maybe this is our future where no one has to be laid off, no one has to worry about bills, and no one has to worry about income because the government is there and will help.
It is not my responsibility to bail out all the unemployed. It is not my responsibility to bailout those behind in the mortgages, et al.
Difference in philosophy that is so evident here on this message. Some get the point, some do not. There will never be agreement on the two sides. So I guess it's time to end this thread because of the two diametrically opposed viewpoints.
Last edited by MoneyMan; 03-14-2009 at 08:10 AM.
03-14-2009, 07:56 AM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 329
5. Many pilots (all of those I've talked to) are not prepared to accept a reduced BLG for an extended period of time. We all budgeted our living on certain assumptions, and if financially prudent established reserves. I'd be willing to bet that most pilots budgeted for a certain income level and at 25-35% reduction can be tolerated for a while (most financial advice says to have a 3-month reserve). But the company has not specified a time line and ALPA has not pushed one, so if this continues, I bet that many, many pilots will begin to be negatively affected. Can every pilot sustain a 30% annual cut for the 2-3 years the company thinks it will take to recover? If everyone can, then we are in good shape. Is this what the pilot group wants.
Medical premiums (up 10% at FedEx) and other expenses have all increased, including energy (gas, electricity, etc.) eating into the reserve for may, and the reduced BLG is starting to affect us. A sustained 30% cut will eventually lead to the depletion of all reserves for many and the inability to meet mortgage expenses quite possibly. I know this is a fact because of emails from other pilots asking for financial advice and help on getting money from their 401k to pay for their mortgage. If you budget on $225,000 and then your income drops to $160,000 or so, your fixed expenses don't change and the safety margin (if it still exists) becomes much smaller. The problem for some is exacerbated by the fact that property values have dropped significantly and you can't get an equity loan to help out.
CONCLUSION: Pilots want the ordeal over with by getting the cutting done with. Quit playing the game, and let the furlough take place if it is inevitable. If not, specify a time limit for the reduced BLGs. No one sees the economy recovering this year, so most likely the company will have to furlough unless the union knows something the rest of the crew force doesn't. So lets get it done so that not everyone ends up paying for this mess. While it is no fun to see brothers on the street, it is a fact of life for many today. Other pilots are furloughed, and many businesses are laying off. To continue this reduction for an extended period of time (two to three years) is going to put many of us in dire financial straights.
Thank you for your time.
Medical premiums (up 10% at FedEx) and other expenses have all increased, including energy (gas, electricity, etc.) eating into the reserve for may, and the reduced BLG is starting to affect us. A sustained 30% cut will eventually lead to the depletion of all reserves for many and the inability to meet mortgage expenses quite possibly. I know this is a fact because of emails from other pilots asking for financial advice and help on getting money from their 401k to pay for their mortgage. If you budget on $225,000 and then your income drops to $160,000 or so, your fixed expenses don't change and the safety margin (if it still exists) becomes much smaller. The problem for some is exacerbated by the fact that property values have dropped significantly and you can't get an equity loan to help out.
CONCLUSION: Pilots want the ordeal over with by getting the cutting done with. Quit playing the game, and let the furlough take place if it is inevitable. If not, specify a time limit for the reduced BLGs. No one sees the economy recovering this year, so most likely the company will have to furlough unless the union knows something the rest of the crew force doesn't. So lets get it done so that not everyone ends up paying for this mess. While it is no fun to see brothers on the street, it is a fact of life for many today. Other pilots are furloughed, and many businesses are laying off. To continue this reduction for an extended period of time (two to three years) is going to put many of us in dire financial straights.
Thank you for your time.
From the first day I was hired, I though 4.A.2.b. was a great thing for our membership to choose to have in the CBA. My buds furloughed from other airlines sat on the sidelines watching guys like you making pre-furlough coin while they themselves had no medical coverage for their families or income for bills.
You are proposing we take the rice from the weaker guys in the POW camp and redistribute it to those of us who will surely live through this. No thanks, buddy. I'll share my rice, get skinny with the rest and leave here with my honor intact. Go crawl back under your rock.
03-14-2009, 08:06 AM
#79
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Social Conservative
Posts: 56
I've given my mea culpa in believing that information and then posting based upon it. It was my mistake, I've said so, and I've apologized. Until the facts are known, I've decided the issue is not a subject for discussion because of the intensity of everyone's feelings. So once again, I withdraw the comment as it was not appropriate.
03-14-2009, 08:26 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Moneyman,
From your initial post:
You remind me of a women that asks if what she's wearing makes her ass look big.
My point on this statement? It's wrong. I don't know what you are looking at, but the president's budget "clearly" does not propose ELIMINATING the tax deduction, at all. If you don't want to believe what the Whitehouse.gov website says they are proposing...Then, just Google it. There are 1000s of articles written about it. Your distortion of the facts, does not make your opinion more valuable. Quite the opposite. And by the way...This proposal, if enacted, will not take effect until 2011. When most economists think the economy will be back on its feet.
I completely agree with this part.
Have a nice weekend.
From your initial post:
...While Dave (and others) fully endorsed President Obama since he was pro-labor, most of us aren't sure how much more pro-labor actions we can take. The President's budget clearly shows that mortgage deductions for people making more than $175,000 will decrease until it is eliminated at $250,000...
Have a nice weekend.
Last edited by Busboy; 03-14-2009 at 08:48 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
