FDX Commuting TA Timebomb
#61
Probably appropriate since everyone knows manhandling the beast is MUCH more demanding that crusing silently through the skies in your glass gucci jets. We ain't got no ovens, no RFOs, or MPCDs...so our captains have to work!
#63
Plus all of that 330 am coffee breath with everyone sitting so close to each other. I'm not so sure that 727 crews shouldn't get the 380 pay. I don't know how you do it!
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
#68
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: A 300 Capt.
Posts: 10
Seems this thread is losing interest...are we really ready to give up THOUSANDS of $$$ to the IRS without a whimper?
Some thoughts...
* The company tried to tax jumpseats at full coach fares a few years ago. Anyone remember that? Eventually, the issue was overturned and forgot about.
* Why wait until the TA to slide this in the back door if it has been on the books for 20+ years? In other words, why now?
* Maybe another carrier had difficulty with their "virtual domicile", but that is not our situation. How about UPS? Do they tax their pilots' DH tickets?
* The literal reading of this could be huge for commuters. How about a joint ALPA-FDX Letter of Intent on how they plan to implement this?
There are a lot of "Sea Lawyers" and "Sea Accountants" trying to make sense of this...sorry, I would rather have a signed letter from ALPA/FDX. So far, no Road Show or comment has made me feel better about this. It could easily negate the total benefits of this TA if it is applied as it is written. Yes, both to Memphians and non-Memphians alike. It could set commuting (or just deviating) back 15 years...
I want to feel good about this TA, but this section is a deal buster until I know more about it.
Some thoughts...
* The company tried to tax jumpseats at full coach fares a few years ago. Anyone remember that? Eventually, the issue was overturned and forgot about.
* Why wait until the TA to slide this in the back door if it has been on the books for 20+ years? In other words, why now?
* Maybe another carrier had difficulty with their "virtual domicile", but that is not our situation. How about UPS? Do they tax their pilots' DH tickets?
* The literal reading of this could be huge for commuters. How about a joint ALPA-FDX Letter of Intent on how they plan to implement this?
There are a lot of "Sea Lawyers" and "Sea Accountants" trying to make sense of this...sorry, I would rather have a signed letter from ALPA/FDX. So far, no Road Show or comment has made me feel better about this. It could easily negate the total benefits of this TA if it is applied as it is written. Yes, both to Memphians and non-Memphians alike. It could set commuting (or just deviating) back 15 years...
I want to feel good about this TA, but this section is a deal buster until I know more about it.
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 767 Cap
Posts: 1,306
Seems this thread is losing interest...are we really ready to give up THOUSANDS of $$$ to the IRS without a whimper?
Some thoughts...
* The company tried to tax jumpseats at full coach fares a few years ago. Anyone remember that? Eventually, the issue was overturned and forgot about.
* Why wait until the TA to slide this in the back door if it has been on the books for 20+ years? In other words, why now?
* Maybe another carrier had difficulty with their "virtual domicile", but that is not our situation. How about UPS? Do they tax their pilots' DH tickets?
* The literal reading of this could be huge for commuters. How about a joint ALPA-FDX Letter of Intent on how they plan to implement this?
There are a lot of "Sea Lawyers" and "Sea Accountants" trying to make sense of this...sorry, I would rather have a signed letter from ALPA/FDX. So far, no Road Show or comment has made me feel better about this. It could easily negate the total benefits of this TA if it is applied as it is written. Yes, both to Memphians and non-Memphians alike. It could set commuting (or just deviating) back 15 years...
I want to feel good about this TA, but this section is a deal buster until I know more about it.
Some thoughts...
* The company tried to tax jumpseats at full coach fares a few years ago. Anyone remember that? Eventually, the issue was overturned and forgot about.
* Why wait until the TA to slide this in the back door if it has been on the books for 20+ years? In other words, why now?
* Maybe another carrier had difficulty with their "virtual domicile", but that is not our situation. How about UPS? Do they tax their pilots' DH tickets?
* The literal reading of this could be huge for commuters. How about a joint ALPA-FDX Letter of Intent on how they plan to implement this?
There are a lot of "Sea Lawyers" and "Sea Accountants" trying to make sense of this...sorry, I would rather have a signed letter from ALPA/FDX. So far, no Road Show or comment has made me feel better about this. It could easily negate the total benefits of this TA if it is applied as it is written. Yes, both to Memphians and non-Memphians alike. It could set commuting (or just deviating) back 15 years...
I want to feel good about this TA, but this section is a deal buster until I know more about it.
Admittedly, I'm not a commuter, but in over 7 years, I have yet to need a ticket from home to Memphis, so how does this affect Memphians? And since when does the company pay you to get to work? I know you can use excess bank money to do it, but if you don't have a Dev bank, the company won't get you a ticket. Therefore, it's understandable that it becomes income when they do. You're getting a ticket to work, for the cost of taxes. Gee, the company won't let me fill my gas tank using my deviation bank, and that's how I get to work. BTW- BC at the MEM roadshow says this avoided a possible IRS audit of our deviation system.
Last edited by fdx727pilot; 09-14-2006 at 09:49 AM. Reason: spelling
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post