Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo
A Question You Need to Answer Before You Vote >

A Question You Need to Answer Before You Vote

Search

Notices
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines

A Question You Need to Answer Before You Vote

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-23-2011, 04:07 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TheBaron's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 608
Default

Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Yes all of your post have been so civil I wonder why anyone dare oppose you. But feel free to dismiss the angry 12 or 20 since you are from the loyal majority.

PS the MEC admits the CGN loa is a bargaining chip why cant you?
Really? Maybe you haven't read the latest update (11-03):

7. Bottom line, we feel there is no more leverage in the FDA, especially when options exist to do business otherwise. We are not fear mongers, just the facts as we see them. Will FedEx use those options if this LOA is not approved? We can’t answer that. We are positive though, that our Company will continue to do business in effort to improve the shareholders’ returns.
TheBaron is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 04:17 AM
  #22  
Proponent of Hysteria
 
FXDX's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 3B
Posts: 1,052
Default

Man, that is a big question. Here I was thinking it was just can I change my vote?!?
FXDX is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 04:17 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Default

Perhaps I just read between the lines where they said if this goes down they will just open it anyways and use SIBA for the FOs. Silly me that is not leverage.
FDXLAG is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 04:18 AM
  #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ptarmigan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: B777 Captain
Posts: 566
Default

Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Yes all of your post have been so civil I wonder why anyone dare oppose you. But feel free to dismiss the angry 12 or 20 since you are from the loyal majority.

PS the MEC admits the CGN loa is a bargaining chip why cant you?
Second part has been answered. First part, I never "dismissed" anyone, just, as I said in another post, pointed out that there is a risk of a false sense of unity on this forum.
ptarmigan is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 04:28 AM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ptarmigan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: B777 Captain
Posts: 566
Default

All of this is a great example of this:

How facts backfire - The Boston Globe
ptarmigan is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 05:18 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Default

Originally Posted by ptarmigan
Second part has been answered. First part, I never "dismissed" anyone, just, as I said in another post, pointed out that there is a risk of a false sense of unity on this forum.
That is true just because it would cost fdx more pilots and more money to open an FDA without a new LOA it should not be considered leverage. Because um help me out here....
FDXLAG is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 05:24 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ptarmigan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: B777 Captain
Posts: 566
Default

Originally Posted by FDXLAG
That is true just because it would cost fdx more pilots and more money to open an FDA without a new LOA it should not be considered leverage. Because um help me out here....
Sorry, I should have finished my thought. I think it would cost a little more, but not a significant amount, particularly when balanced with other aspects in this TA. Not enough difference to constitute leverage of any significance.
ptarmigan is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 05:26 AM
  #28  
Part Time Employee
 
MaxKts's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Default

Originally Posted by ptarmigan
Sorry, I should have finished my thought. I think it would cost a little more, but not a significant amount, particularly when balanced with other aspects in this TA. Not enough difference to constitute leverage of any significance.
So - it's leverage just not significant leverage?
MaxKts is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 05:26 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Default

Originally Posted by ptarmigan
Sorry, I should have finished my thought. I think it would cost a little more, but not a significant amount, particularly when balanced with other aspects in this TA. Not enough difference to constitute leverage of any significance.
But in another thread you worry that the cost could reach the point where they hire the Irish pilots to take our place, right.
FDXLAG is offline  
Old 02-23-2011, 05:34 AM
  #30  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Default

Originally Posted by ptarmigan
Second part has been answered. First part, I never "dismissed" anyone, just, as I said in another post, pointed out that there is a risk of a false sense of unity on this forum.
It has been answered, but is the answer correct? That is the big question. I would have to say that it is an incorrect answer.

Supposedly on the last FDA LOA our NC didnt think there was leverage. I believe they were dead wrong. Even though we have a new group negotiating, the same mistake can be made again.

I would submit that even if we do have leverage, the company could possibly tell us to take a hike anyway. A control thing. I could be wrong, but it is not out of the realm of reality. If that is the case, so be it. Ones vote should be principled, tempered with reality. I would go with the principled angle until reality has proven to be a sure thing.
Opposing View is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
alpar80
Regional
8
10-07-2008 11:14 AM
BrownGirls YUM
Cargo
206
07-08-2008 08:32 PM
Ellen
Regional
193
09-21-2007 06:11 PM
Freighter Captain
Major
2
05-12-2005 11:45 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices