TonyC

As you may know from my previous comments, I always read his e-mails with a smile, as I consider them to be nothing but entertainment. The day we start taking that stuff seriously is the day we start stressing ourselves out unneccessarily. However, he did manage to sneak a nugget of truth into his most recent missive.


AMEN!!!


There's no reason to be working more than 100%. Not even 100.1%!



No, it's obvious that FedEx doesn't even need us to work more than 100%, or we would have a Tentative Agreement to ratify. FedEx management has clearly demonstrated their willingness and ability to negotiate a contract when it's in their best interest. Witness the USPS contract negotiated a full two years early, extending our relationship with them until 2013. Yes, given the wonderful relationship between these two groups, FedEx Express and USPS, a contract comes easy. And, yes, it IS FedEx EXPRESS, not FedEx Corp, or FedEx Ground, or FedEx Custom Critical, or FedEx Kinkos. It's FedEx Express, that company responsible for the very existence of the FedEx brand, the company that guarantees delivery tomorrow morning around the globe - - Absolutely, Positively - - and that company which is now spoken of like Scotch tape, a Xerox copy, and an ice cold Coke. Oh, and did I mention, it's the company that cannot exist without airplanes?


No, Capt L., you're correct on this one. We shouldn't push ourselves too hard, and we should enjoy our time off - - ALL of our time off.


Keep your cool, guys - - it's just a business transaction. Give 100.0% - - and then relax.



When they realize they depend on us giving MORE than 100% to make it work every day, perhaps they'll get serious about achieving a contract that recognizes our continued contribution to the continued success of this company.





.

Diesel 10

Amen, Tony. We all need to be enjoying our days off. After our 100.0% effort at work...

captain_drew

Tony,

Who IS the Chief Pilot now?

. .. and . .. BTW. . was that great photo of the Freight Fuhrer taken at the felony assault trial of his son in Virginia? . . or does he look constantly PO-ed these days? . . . in anticipation of having to pay you guys what you are really worth?

You every consider putting him more in character? It might look like this:
http://www.farm-boy-navy-pilot-airli...ightFurher.jpg

sandman2122

Here's a novel idea:

PROTECT MIN DAYS OFF

Fedex999999

ROTFL, Capt Drew!!!!!

TonyC

Some people call him Jack, some people call him JL, I try not to call him at all. I avoided Norfolk trips so I wouldn't have to bump him off the jumpseat ...



Some of you may recall, some of you may have forgotten, and many of you may have never heard about the e-mail he sent to one of our Captains for bumping a jumpseater. The jumpseater happened to be one of the guys that works for him (I don't recall if he was a "dispatcher" or a scheduler, but I think he was a scheduler). In his brief e-mail, he sarcastically "thanked" the Captain for bumping the guy, and hoped that the guy (scheduler) would have a chance to "pay him back."

Mind you, the Captain received the e-mail out of the blue, without any opportunity to defend his actions. The union heard about it, and contacted JL, and JL sent a follow-up e-mail. While the first may have been explained away as a spur of the moment, heat of the battle, hot-headed mistake, the followup e-mail was sent only after considered thought and time to reflect on the repercussions.

To paraphrase: "Dear Captain, The union has asked me to apologize for my previous e-mail. Rather than pass such an apology through union channels, I'm sending you this e-mail directly to tell you that I do NOT apologize. I meant what I said. I stick up for MY people."


Mind you, pilots are "his" people in the sense of employee/supervisor status. Apparently the schedulers are more important, and more trustworthy in his eyes.


If you think he's the pilots' friend, you're only fooling yourself.




Ironically, this photo was taken on a day when he should have been gloriously happy. My speculation runs along the same line of thought as your suggestion - - he's thinking about paying us. More specifically, he's thinking about how much he's going to have to pay us to fly the A380.

The picture was taken the day of the A380 Reveal, the huge ceremony where they rolled out the new bird for all the heads of state and CEOs of the companies that had ordered some. I found this particular pose on the Airbus website. Fairly representative of his demeanor, I'd say.





Of course, you've seen the movie Castaway, where Fred does the cameo appearance where he talks about the missing pilots, "Our lost sons," and welcoming back this employee that was lost, and is now found. You know why they had to do so many "takes" of that scene?!?!?




.

42GO

[QUOTE=TonyC]Some people call him Jack, some people call him JL, I try not to call him at all. I avoided Norfolk trips so I wouldn't have to bump him off the jumpseat ...



Some of you may recall, some of you may have forgotten


So let me get this right, your going to bump Jack because he is Jack, a pilot.
And your saying he is not one of us......maybe your the one that needs to look in the mirror.
And I am NOT a new hire!

captain_drew

[quote=42GO]NO. . because he was 'Jack, the Chief Pilot' who was riding on a 'personal' jumpseat.

Having him on board would have violated FARs. . . the one that says you have to be mentally fit to fly. All the BS he (and other management pilots) have heaped down on this group would certainly cause Tony . .and most other non-Koolaide chuggers to be too distracted to safely operate. I would have bumped him too. . . out of concern for 'safety of flight'.

TonyC

Exactly.




NO, he is not one of us. Look at which side of the Negotiating table he sits one.




P.S. your = possessive pronoun, 2nd person, used to denote that which belongs to "you"

you're = contraction for "you are"


.

captain_drew

Thanks for helping me not be the only a$$whole who spanks the illiterati for improper usage of the language . .y'all