golfandfly

Uncle! I give!

I wish you luck on your quest. I hope pilots get the housing allowance regardless of residency. I think you will be laughed out of court with your argument, but again, good luck.

WorkerBee

golfandfly,

I tried to get a simple answer so I wasn't misrepresenting your position. I will have to try and read into your response a little. I apologize in advance if I am wrong in my interpretations.

From your comment about summer vacation I assume you mean the pilot gets to decide where he wants to be on 25% of his days off. The other 75% you feel it is completely reasonable for the company to dictate where he is.

Wow. I don't know what else to say. I really hope you are in the 5% group at FedEx. The fact that one of our own is advocating for the company to be able to dictate to an employee where they must be on their time off is so troubling to me I can't begin to describe. Then you add that they can tell a non employee where they have to be is beyond comprehension. So the pilot's spouse says they are going to leave HKG and you would advocate physically restraining them???

Thankfully, I don't think there is any chance that a court will uphold your views.

golfandfly

Get off the crack pipe!! I never said what percentage of time someone needs to be in domicile. Ever. I mentioned that, if I were dumb enough to take this package, I would move my wife and kids to Hong Kong where they would attend school. When school wasn't in session (holidays, I presumed summers since I have no idea what the school schedule in Hong Kong would be), they can go anywhere they choose, just like the way I live in my primary residence now. When your wife and kids are still living in the old house in the states and you are jumpseating back there every time your off work, I'd say it isn't your primary residence.

If you want the housing allowance, just move over there! It's not that hard. If you can go to your disciplinary hearing and tell the chief pilot that you have done that, you have nothing to worry about! If you are using it as a crash pad, you may have issues. That conversation is between the pilots and management. Honestly, I could care less what they are doing, the LOA is garbage and those guys deserve the allowance no matter what.

When I consider the words "primary residence" it's not my crashpad, it's not my layover hotel, it's where I live.

Not to kill your F. Lee Bailey moment, but this is an ALPA negotiated deal. A deal that our union approved (I have no idea why). No one has been forced there and no one forced to take the money intended for those that actually move there. Good luck with your discrimination claim.

I'm not a company or union lackey. But, I am smart enough to read a contract and do my best to abide by it. If I have an interpretation issue, I call the union. You may see a lot of grey area here, I just don't. It just isn't that difficult. If you CHOOSE to take the additional money, MOVE THERE! Don't like it? Don't bid it, or don't take the money. Push the union to make this issue #1 in our negotiations. Change the rules!

3pointlanding

I spent a long time overseas (20 years) and here is how my U.S. company handled it. We all got housing allowances single or married but it was the company that paid the rent to the landlord not us. No one could profit from this arrangement. Since we all had resident permits we could file as bonified residents on our 1040's no questions asked, and yes we were all audited and we all passed with flying colors. We all filled out long form W-2's and claimed 99 dependents and the company did not take any taxes out of our salary. Since we were living overseas and paid in dollars, our salary was protected by an adjustment every month depending on the exchage rate for the previous month. This is how the company and union should have approached the LOA.
A moot point now and the offenders should have made sure they understood the contract before agreeing to move overseas.

FDXLAG

Guilty huh, you have a future in Contract Enforcement?

iarapilot

That sounds like a good way to do it. Unfortunately, our NC took no advice from the current (then) FDA residents. And, seems they did little research before coming up with said agreement.

As far as understanding the contract pertaining to FDA requirements on the relocation/housing benefits, the contract seems clear....almost. You have to relocate/get a dwelling, get the required visas, and show a lease. That seems to have been mostly done by the majority of the crews. If the Company is going to terminate somebody, they need to specifically explain the reasons as it pertains to the language in the contract.

I could be a rich guy with many houses all over the globe. When I relocate to HKG and keep my other houses, is that a no go, especially when I go to my different places on my time off?

I would think that the Union, at the least, would get a definitive clarification from the Company concerning the contractual requirements. And, the Company, being of the PSP mindset would volunteer that info. None of that is happening.

One of the offenders was told by our grievance dude that he should take the Companies settlement because it would basically get his job back.....if he does end up getting terminated. That is, payback around 180G's (he was told that he could make the loss up after being reinstated!!!), admit guilt, be on probation for awhile, and sign a non disclosure letter. Doesnt look like the Union is "fighting" for us. And, you would thing that a non disclosure would mean that there is something somebody doesnt want others to know.

FDXLAG

And people wonder why there is a puck your buddy mentality with regards to open time, disputed pairings, and 140 hour months. Were I him I would hire a lawyer and sue the company and union over the agency shop and changing the terms of employment with the 2006 contract. I would try to make up the 180K 2% at a time. If they wont protect your job what good are they. I might not win but it would be fun to see ALPA hire some good lawyers when it was their money on the line.

Nitefrater

Be sure to read the fine print on that lawyer's business card - the part that reads: "You have an EXCELLENT case! We'll sue 'em all the way to the Supreme Court... or your last dollar, whichever comes first."

Albief15

So what do you think would happen if the union said "hell--fight them! We'll kick their ass in court..." and then LOST the case.

Pilots are about the only group who routinely sue their own union. I'm sure a terminated pilot would quickly wheel around and say he made the call based on bad advice from his union legal team. It creates a situation where the attorneys for the union are often in a tough spot. I'm not an attorney, but if I were counseling a guy who might lose a 6 million dollar career if I was wrong, but could keep his job for 180k, I sort of understand why a pragmatic approach might be offered. Remember, I was the guy that was SURE section 26k was an automatic pay raise for the 777... We know how that turned out. So--I understand caution when making decisions that affect people's lives.

One thing I will offer for everyone here...its easy to say "heck--they should just do XXXX " If you are facing a decision tree where one option is termination, that's a serious gut check. That is why I wrote checks to the horse handler de-planers a few years back. This ain't a puss game, when you are betting your career you need to do so with some serious thought.

Again--HKG has always been a mess. The silver lining to this is whatever is EXPECTED of the pilots there and whatever is ACTUALLY REQUIRED should soon be delineated and made clear. Let's move this grey into some black and white. I just hope we can fix it without hurting any of our pilots along the way.

FDXLAG

Actually there are some right to work groups I would talk to before I spent my money.