fedupbusdriver

Did you guys not see the ?

fdx727pilot

Boy, you must have spread 'em wide and dug deep to pull that analogy out. However, since you asked, I don't think about the 777 pay rates. Sometime in the next year, the System Board will come out with a decision on what the 777 will pay, and you, me , or anyone else on this board won't have squat to say about influencing the outcome. I didn't bid it, don't hold an award for it, and based on the seniority of people who do, won't be flying it for many years to come.

As for year 1-5 pay, I thought new hire pay was good when I was hired, and think new hire pay is good now. It certainly deserves no more effort to increase the rates than any other pay rate in the CBA.

Considering that years 1-5 SOs and FOs have the biggest increases in pay, both strictly dollar-wise and percentage-wise, of any comparable period for any other seat listed in the CBA, no, I don't think they need to be improved more than anyone else on the seniority list.

FDXLAG

Considering that they start at the lowest point it does not take a rocket surgeon to figure out why they have the biggest increases. To take your logic the other way; if we increase first year pay we will decrease the amount of the increase they get the second year. This will put their pay raises more in line with the rest of us. Thus by increasing first year pay we are really sticking it to the new guys; feel better?

Jetjok

There's a distinction between "new hire pay" and "first year pay" and perhaps that's part of the semantics issue here. New hire pay has been unchanged for going on 20 years, perhaps more, and certainly should be increased substantially. If you look at the actual cost of this increase, you'll quickly come to the conclusion, even if it's increased to $3000 a month, that we're really not talking about much money at all. Assume for example that FedEx hires 200 new guys next year (Yeah, I know, it wasn't a good week to give up sniffing glue), and that each of these 200 guys takes 4 months to make it to the line. The difference in cost is only $800,000. A mere pittance. Of course, we know: 1) it doesn't take 4 months to make it to the line; 2) a few guys won't make it at all; and 3) we're probably not talking about 200 new hires in any contract year. Besides, Mayday Mark or BusBoy could fund these increases from their petty cash stashes.

Then we have the issue of "first year pay". In my opinion, based on the graph of first year pays posted earlier in this thread, it seems to be in line with the industry standard, if not a little better. Perhaps it will be increased, along with all other years, at the next contract. As for the large percentage increases happening in the first five years, I applaud that and remember fondly seeing those large increases in my monthly paycheck when I hit a new year-group. And in the first few years of the FedEx experience, regardless of how much ones making, those $10K per year increases were very welcome and much anticipated.

JJ

FDXLAG

I for one am tired of the new guys getting the big raises. I say we increase first year pay and second year pay to third year pay.

I always find it funny that it is a universal axiom that first year pay sucks but that is part of the hazing process. But we as union member justify paying our first year guys squat because our squat is better than it is over at brand Z. I remember geting a draft trip as a first year guy. It wasn't much, just an out and back, but my take home pay went up from 1300 to 1500. Sweet it was, is that the right lesson we want to teach our little ones?

Daniel Larusso

JJ is right point out the differences between newhire and first year pay. Most of those carriers mentioned pay you the 1st year rate for whatever aircraft you are assigned from day 1, usually at RLG or average BLG while in training depending on the carrier. Also if you're being fair, than I think it must be mentioned that the rates at carriers like UAL, AA, and UsAir East have been greatly affected by bankruptcy concessions or the threat of bk. Their previous rates tended to be in the neighborhood of what we have-except most of those contracts were ratified in the 1998-2000 era vs. 2006 making it less impressive than it might initially appear. Also because of the lower rates involved, I would submit that the differences in guarantees, other first year bennies, and average actual CH flown between carriers have a more dramatic effect on first year compensation than they do over time. It makes it so guys at carriers like Southwest and JetBlue can actually make considerably more than a first year FDX guy or for someone at a carrier with a much lower payrate to be closer in compensation then you might think at first blush. No matter what carrier we're talking about, we all basically pay for our training with our first year pay across the industry. At some carriers we pay for it twice. They take solid advantage of our 'rite of passage' feelings from the military, commuter, and corporate worlds to make us feel ok about it.

MaydayMark

OK ... I give up, what a "rocket surgeon?" (I was a rocket scientist in a previous life, I know what that is?)

Jetjok

Mark,

I seriously doubt that you were a rocket scientist in a previous life, especially since you don't appear to know how to spell know.

JJ

Busboy

I say, "Let them eat cake!!"









Preferably at Foxhunter's retirement party in the AOC.

FDXLAG

Luckily my humor is not lost on me. And that is all that is important. If a Rocket Scientist is smart and a Brain Surgeon is smart than I figure a Rocket Surgeon is even more smarter still.