golfandfly

If you are a lawyer, you really need to work on your skills. The argument you make is beyond poor.

FedEx has never forced anyone to work at a FDA location. FedEx has never forced anyone to take the housing allowance. I read the LOAs, did you? What was the intent? FedEx wants pilots to actually live in domicile. Why? Taxes, availability, etc. So they decided to sweeten the deal to get to people to uproot their families and move there.

I thought it was a lousy deal. But it is obvious to me, and should have been to others that to receive the allowance, you need to make Hong Kong your primary residence. Everyone was offered amnesty. Repay FedEx the housing allowance and you will not face discipline. Some took it, others didn't.

Those that chose to challenge the company are well within their right to do so. ALPA should vigorously defend them. Where it ends up is between the affected parties and FedEx. I hope the pilots win their dispute.

But to allege discrimination or loss of rights is really a weak argument. FedEx has offered the FDA for all of us, regardless of race, gender, or marital status. No one has been involuntarily assigned.

Huck

Actually, it is a pretty darn good argument.

Wiki is your friend: Protected group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Look at the relative seniority of HKG pilots vs. other bases. It is obvious there is a monetary benefit to bidding HKG or CGN - you can upgrade at an earlier seniority. If you cannot bid them due to discrimination based on your family status, you suffer damages in the form of decreased salary. I've certainly seen weaker constitutional claims.

golfandfly

Good luck with that one! Really??

Seniority is lower because not many pilots want to live in Hong Kong and its not a good deal. If I were one of the Hong Kong 5, I'd rather have my attorney key in on residency issues rather than discrimination.

golfandfly

Also... Again, FedEx has not denied married people access to bid HKG. They' e never made it mandatory to reside there. Commute to your hearts content, just don't accept the housing allowance. It's a big difference.

FDXLAG

So where in the LOA or the contract or the personal agreement does it say if you take the housing allowance you cant go where you want on your days off?

And some of us figured out that the seniority at HKG was going to be way out whack at lot sooner than others. And not because it will go senior.

Gunter

Yeah, I won't be bidding a foreign domicile anytime soon.

I'm sure it's a real treat dealing with FDX legal.

There's a manager that decided this was the only way to do this. Someone, please ID said manager. I don't like it when they try and play the man behind the curtain.

Alaskan

The housing allowance is a benefit of employment. Single pilots get it without any argument once they sign the LOA and apply for it. Married pilots only get it if they can make a third party -- a person who is not party to the agreement between the pilot and the company -- move to Hong Kong. There's no difference between this and a requirement that makes a pilot force her or his next door neighbor to move to Hong Kong in order for the pilot to rate the housing allowance.

Contracts between two parties can't force or require the cooperation of a third, non-party entity. Nor can performance of the contract be predicated on events beyond either party's control. So, unless you actually think that (mainly male) pilots have control over their (mainly female) spouses in this day and age, any provision in the LOA that requires this of the pilot party is invalid. (Exceptions in countries practicing Sharia law, of course!)

When a chief pilot strts telling his crews where their wives can work and what kinds of jobs are OK under the LOA (e.g. flight attendant OK, corporate manager not), you know the company is way outside the lines.

Fly FDX

We always pay for them; Smart, generous people don't need help...

FoamFlier

Alaskan,
Good job articulating these arguments, I hope that all of this will disseminate to the line. I know I will borrow some of the verbiage, if you don't mind, as my BS in Aviation only afforded a working knowledge of legalese.
I feel we will be fighting an uphill battle as many of the people I have spoke to have a 'golfandfly' attitude. They think the FDA LOA was bad but condemn all that bid it thinking that they knew what they were getting into. I will do my part to try and help the out of sight out of mind mentality and shed some light on what kind of bad precedence this is setting. Not just about the FDA atrocities, but how it will creep into other parts of our lives and domiciles.

Iwa Washi

Any FedEx pilot, regardless of domicile, who believes that we collectively should allow the company to codify that they can force any one of us to remain physically present in a specific geographical location against our will, when we are off duty and on our own personal time, should have their head examined.