UPS pilots urged to approved contract
07-08-2006, 01:38 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Unknown
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by sandman2122
Who knows, maybe you guys will get the last laugh when both groups have a signed TA, we'll see.
07-08-2006, 03:47 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Unknown
Posts: 211
Sandman, don't mistake a yes vote for 100% happiness with the contract. Hell, I'm about 60% happy and 40% "I can't believe we didn't get this/gave that away".
We can vote no 5 times, I just don't think in the end what we get will be a marked improvement. Probably no improvement at all.
We can vote no 5 times, I just don't think in the end what we get will be a marked improvement. Probably no improvement at all.
07-08-2006, 09:03 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
As USMC indicated...
Bottom line is what your W-2 says at the end of the year and your retirement plan balances are what count (plus not being beaten down into a zombie state with poor work rules...). High per hour wages are lightening rods in the press...the man on the street doesn't understand that 300/hr doesn't mean 120 hours a month (40 wk x 4 weeks).
What matters is wages combined with duty and trip rigs...along with "hidden" wage increases like B fund improvements. FDX ALPA went for a min pay/day and a lot of improvements...the net compensation improvement (if approved) will be much better than just the per hour increase.
Take a close look at your contract--if it boosts your pay to the level you think is acceptable...sign it. If you don't--I seriously doubt it will take 2 years to get another TA.
Don't know how our union ended up being the "bad guy" here...we are trying to support you guys and wish you the best of luck.
Bottom line is what your W-2 says at the end of the year and your retirement plan balances are what count (plus not being beaten down into a zombie state with poor work rules...). High per hour wages are lightening rods in the press...the man on the street doesn't understand that 300/hr doesn't mean 120 hours a month (40 wk x 4 weeks).
What matters is wages combined with duty and trip rigs...along with "hidden" wage increases like B fund improvements. FDX ALPA went for a min pay/day and a lot of improvements...the net compensation improvement (if approved) will be much better than just the per hour increase.
Take a close look at your contract--if it boosts your pay to the level you think is acceptable...sign it. If you don't--I seriously doubt it will take 2 years to get another TA.
Don't know how our union ended up being the "bad guy" here...we are trying to support you guys and wish you the best of luck.
07-09-2006, 05:15 AM
#18
Trust but Verify!!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
"Don't know how our union ended up being the "bad guy" here...we are trying to support you guys and wish you the best of luck."
Albief, that was a nice explanation of trip rigs vs hourly pay. Anyone who doesn't factor in work rules with compensation for a total package is ignorant of how a contract really works with all sections playing a part. Ignorance needs a scapegoat thus the answer to your question. Either way it will be up to UPS pilots to decide if this is the contract they deserve. Hopefully most will understand the total package they vote for. FedEx will be next in the hot seat.
Albief, that was a nice explanation of trip rigs vs hourly pay. Anyone who doesn't factor in work rules with compensation for a total package is ignorant of how a contract really works with all sections playing a part. Ignorance needs a scapegoat thus the answer to your question. Either way it will be up to UPS pilots to decide if this is the contract they deserve. Hopefully most will understand the total package they vote for. FedEx will be next in the hot seat.
07-09-2006, 06:19 AM
#19
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 61
The Truth
My apologies in advance to the length of this post.
Addressing the FDX fallacy. Using the "reasonable Marine theory" is it plausible to accept without question the excuses of a leadership that clearly has had significant difficulties and a negotiating team that was and still is severely split?
Let’s look at a few historical facts here before we all jump off the deep end:
IPA leadership changes after a campaign of alleged "reform" and promises of "transparency". The old guy is out, the new guys are in, and pilot expectations are at an all time high. Lots of promises.
IPA leadership and negotiators are getting a little unnerved after a considerable amount of time and energy at the table with little progress to show for its efforts. It seems that UPS management was totally unimpressed with the change of faces and negotiates in its usual manner.......hard!
At the same time, serious cracks in IPA leadership begin to appear, a VP is ousted, and increasing concerns over the lack of progress at the table begin to put the negotiators under increased pressure and scrutiny. The leaking of a few sections of the contract already TA'ed causes real concern and anger among many of the pilots. Of real concern, it seems that despite constant warnings from many of its own pilots, the IPA negotiators are prepared to do some real damage to the concept of "Captains Authority". Special meetings are held to assuage the growing anxiety. President of the union makes some questionable statements regarding Captains Authority and it's use as a tool in negotiations which cause so much of a concern, that the President of ALPA feels it prudent to make a public statement clarifying ALPA's position on Captains Authority in the hopes that it can help mitigate any damage done and hopefully preserve the interpretation that was forged recently at FDX.... Excuses for the Jump seat Matrix abound. More on this in a moment....cause this gets good.
Promises of transparency go unfulfilled. Under increasing pressure and scrutiny, this administration begins to lockdown. Out of frustration, several committee chairs resign. The promises of inclusion go ignored, even some of the negotiating team feel left out as the president and the Negotiating Chairman override any input.
At the same time, the fracturing within the negotiating team continues. It seems that (to their credit) two of the negotiating team members are beginning to feel that the chief negotiator and the president are not operating consistent with the promises they made when elected. More leaks? From who are from where? Hmmmm. A letter from one negotiating member is leaked alleging that the chief negotiator and president are succumbing to UPS pressure and "have no bottom line".
Accusations that the President of the IPA may have crossed an active picket line. First a denial, then an admission, but "he didn't inhale".
Captain’s authority back in the news. Several pilots who understand the concept (sans the President or the Negotiating Chairman unfortunately), decide to not allow UPS to manage their cockpits and deny boarding to P 3 riders. Discipline happens. (I must admit, Eddie is one smart, tough Captain who understands the concept completely and refuses to be intimidated). Here is the bottom line: The IPA position that its Jump seat Matrix was presented as a way to limit the company’s use of jump seats was to be severely tested. Initially, its proponents naively believed that by stating that "this in no way will supersede Captains Authority" would keep them out of trouble. Not so. Here is a little tip: If the language in your contract requires you to reiterate an already established regulation, perhaps it is smarter to steer clear of it or at least go back and do a rewrite. In the end, after UPS managements true intentions are revealed, the negotiators and the President admit that perhaps a mistake was made on this one, yet the Matrix remains in the TA.
Ticket Deviation bank. Back when the President and the Chairman of the negotiating team were defending the Matrix concept, the linking of the two concepts of Jump Seats and Ticket banks are cleverly linked with SCOPE. It is alleged that UPS management agrees that it would allow the FDX deviation policy in exchange for FDX scope. Clever......but I believe it never happened. I believe, from reliable sources that it was presented this way to take the pressure off the negotiators because they had agreed to the Matrix long before they truly realized its significance and its ramifications on Captains Authority. Ask yourself why it was later decided to include the "will not supersede Captains Authority" clause? In this regard and to bolster the troops...the negotiating chairman declares ....."But we have achieved 100% ticket banks for domestic travel"! Some of the smarter people, who pay closer attention point out that we already have 80%, so it really is just a 20% gain. Also, there are questions and concerns concerning returns from International locations to domestic stations short to home base and how the new rules would apply. Bottom line: This is not the same ticket policy as FDX. At FDX, the deviation policy allows travel up to three days prior and three days after a pairing/trip, from and to and wherever you want. Deviation accepted fares (your work with's) are based on the larger airlines, not the discount ones.....while not perfect, believe me, your ticket deviation policy being sold as the same as FDX, is not the same. (For those of you unfamiliar with this topic, this is not only a crew comfort issue; it involves increased pay and staffing.....(want to really talk Scope and crew advancement?) very important issue here! Disastrous for your growth and security as a pilot group to exclude International DH tickets, IMHO. Not to mention the little clause in the TA that states, if you deviate and do not travel on a Sunday you are docked pay in this TA. That’s not right.
Look, I can go on and on, but this is already too long. In summation, if you were brought a TA by a leadership that was unified, competent and consistent and they recommended ratification, I would say ....go for it. In this case however, it may be better to proceed carefully and weigh all the options. I really can't stand it when I hear someone say, well, we really don't like it all that much....and it should have been better, but you better vote yes, because the alternative is much worse. Why even have a voting option if that is the way it is going to be presented. (What this really means by the way is, we have screwed this up so badly it is FUBAR). UPS is making record profits, they make deals every day, if you say no to this, the sun will rise the next day.....but.....IMHO, to have credibility, you have to change the faces again. To send the same ones back in would invite disaster for so many reasons I think unnecessary to list here. The same faces would feel neutered and under even more pressure, especially since they recommended ratification, and the company would fall into the same negotiating patterns.............nope........you need new guys. Blame FDX, blame Bob, blame me……..who cares……just get a contract commensurate with your contributions.
So,,,,,,,,,FDX caused your negotiators to fold? Hmm.
How about these FDX topics? Is the reverse true?
Captain’s authority: (undeniably the bar was set high at FDX)
Ticket Deviation: Using the IPA logic, How come UPS didn't see that in the FDX contract?
I can go on, but ....me thinks this IPA leadership is running low on excuses. The UPS pilots deserve better.
Addressing the FDX fallacy. Using the "reasonable Marine theory" is it plausible to accept without question the excuses of a leadership that clearly has had significant difficulties and a negotiating team that was and still is severely split?
Let’s look at a few historical facts here before we all jump off the deep end:
IPA leadership changes after a campaign of alleged "reform" and promises of "transparency". The old guy is out, the new guys are in, and pilot expectations are at an all time high. Lots of promises.
IPA leadership and negotiators are getting a little unnerved after a considerable amount of time and energy at the table with little progress to show for its efforts. It seems that UPS management was totally unimpressed with the change of faces and negotiates in its usual manner.......hard!
At the same time, serious cracks in IPA leadership begin to appear, a VP is ousted, and increasing concerns over the lack of progress at the table begin to put the negotiators under increased pressure and scrutiny. The leaking of a few sections of the contract already TA'ed causes real concern and anger among many of the pilots. Of real concern, it seems that despite constant warnings from many of its own pilots, the IPA negotiators are prepared to do some real damage to the concept of "Captains Authority". Special meetings are held to assuage the growing anxiety. President of the union makes some questionable statements regarding Captains Authority and it's use as a tool in negotiations which cause so much of a concern, that the President of ALPA feels it prudent to make a public statement clarifying ALPA's position on Captains Authority in the hopes that it can help mitigate any damage done and hopefully preserve the interpretation that was forged recently at FDX.... Excuses for the Jump seat Matrix abound. More on this in a moment....cause this gets good.
Promises of transparency go unfulfilled. Under increasing pressure and scrutiny, this administration begins to lockdown. Out of frustration, several committee chairs resign. The promises of inclusion go ignored, even some of the negotiating team feel left out as the president and the Negotiating Chairman override any input.
At the same time, the fracturing within the negotiating team continues. It seems that (to their credit) two of the negotiating team members are beginning to feel that the chief negotiator and the president are not operating consistent with the promises they made when elected. More leaks? From who are from where? Hmmmm. A letter from one negotiating member is leaked alleging that the chief negotiator and president are succumbing to UPS pressure and "have no bottom line".
Accusations that the President of the IPA may have crossed an active picket line. First a denial, then an admission, but "he didn't inhale".
Captain’s authority back in the news. Several pilots who understand the concept (sans the President or the Negotiating Chairman unfortunately), decide to not allow UPS to manage their cockpits and deny boarding to P 3 riders. Discipline happens. (I must admit, Eddie is one smart, tough Captain who understands the concept completely and refuses to be intimidated). Here is the bottom line: The IPA position that its Jump seat Matrix was presented as a way to limit the company’s use of jump seats was to be severely tested. Initially, its proponents naively believed that by stating that "this in no way will supersede Captains Authority" would keep them out of trouble. Not so. Here is a little tip: If the language in your contract requires you to reiterate an already established regulation, perhaps it is smarter to steer clear of it or at least go back and do a rewrite. In the end, after UPS managements true intentions are revealed, the negotiators and the President admit that perhaps a mistake was made on this one, yet the Matrix remains in the TA.
Ticket Deviation bank. Back when the President and the Chairman of the negotiating team were defending the Matrix concept, the linking of the two concepts of Jump Seats and Ticket banks are cleverly linked with SCOPE. It is alleged that UPS management agrees that it would allow the FDX deviation policy in exchange for FDX scope. Clever......but I believe it never happened. I believe, from reliable sources that it was presented this way to take the pressure off the negotiators because they had agreed to the Matrix long before they truly realized its significance and its ramifications on Captains Authority. Ask yourself why it was later decided to include the "will not supersede Captains Authority" clause? In this regard and to bolster the troops...the negotiating chairman declares ....."But we have achieved 100% ticket banks for domestic travel"! Some of the smarter people, who pay closer attention point out that we already have 80%, so it really is just a 20% gain. Also, there are questions and concerns concerning returns from International locations to domestic stations short to home base and how the new rules would apply. Bottom line: This is not the same ticket policy as FDX. At FDX, the deviation policy allows travel up to three days prior and three days after a pairing/trip, from and to and wherever you want. Deviation accepted fares (your work with's) are based on the larger airlines, not the discount ones.....while not perfect, believe me, your ticket deviation policy being sold as the same as FDX, is not the same. (For those of you unfamiliar with this topic, this is not only a crew comfort issue; it involves increased pay and staffing.....(want to really talk Scope and crew advancement?) very important issue here! Disastrous for your growth and security as a pilot group to exclude International DH tickets, IMHO. Not to mention the little clause in the TA that states, if you deviate and do not travel on a Sunday you are docked pay in this TA. That’s not right.
Look, I can go on and on, but this is already too long. In summation, if you were brought a TA by a leadership that was unified, competent and consistent and they recommended ratification, I would say ....go for it. In this case however, it may be better to proceed carefully and weigh all the options. I really can't stand it when I hear someone say, well, we really don't like it all that much....and it should have been better, but you better vote yes, because the alternative is much worse. Why even have a voting option if that is the way it is going to be presented. (What this really means by the way is, we have screwed this up so badly it is FUBAR). UPS is making record profits, they make deals every day, if you say no to this, the sun will rise the next day.....but.....IMHO, to have credibility, you have to change the faces again. To send the same ones back in would invite disaster for so many reasons I think unnecessary to list here. The same faces would feel neutered and under even more pressure, especially since they recommended ratification, and the company would fall into the same negotiating patterns.............nope........you need new guys. Blame FDX, blame Bob, blame me……..who cares……just get a contract commensurate with your contributions.
So,,,,,,,,,FDX caused your negotiators to fold? Hmm.
How about these FDX topics? Is the reverse true?
Captain’s authority: (undeniably the bar was set high at FDX)
Ticket Deviation: Using the IPA logic, How come UPS didn't see that in the FDX contract?
I can go on, but ....me thinks this IPA leadership is running low on excuses. The UPS pilots deserve better.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
