FAA to reconsider rest exclusion for cargo fl
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: CA 767
Posts: 402
Brownie, Your an Idiot. Plan and Simple. You know it, and everyone knows it. Hopefully your boyfriend knows it.
Sitting in the back of a Freighter is total Horse Crap. And how you make 220 is a lie. Unless your 15th year pay. which matches FDX. So the Pay is the same. But they have QOL that we will never have with attitudes like yours. You need to raise your self worth.
Sitting in the back of a Freighter is total Horse Crap. And how you make 220 is a lie. Unless your 15th year pay. which matches FDX. So the Pay is the same. But they have QOL that we will never have with attitudes like yours. You need to raise your self worth.
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,126
Yeah sounds a bit far fetched to me Brownie. Highest hourly for a UPS FO is like $185. I've got great friend in ANC who doesn't make anywhere near that. If you are a commuter it's hard to over value FDX's deadhead/deviate policy. The guys I know at UPS like it but they also really want our contract. Both good places to work and I hope we get the cutout removed.
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
I haven't read the UPS contract, but I'm sure there are certain parts that are superior to Fedex. And vice versa.
I'm not sure how this became a UPS versus FDX or IPA versus ALPA situation, I think both groups want the cargo cutout eliminated. The IPA and ALPA are going about this in different ways, which I think is positive as well.
I'm sure we have widebody FOs that are making 88k. Those are guys that voluntarily drop their trips to do other things. We have widebody FOs making in excess of 220K, that much is for sure. No matter where you are working, you are doing something extra if you are making that much money. The math doesn't work out otherwise.
This thread is beyond ridiculous...
I'm not sure how this became a UPS versus FDX or IPA versus ALPA situation, I think both groups want the cargo cutout eliminated. The IPA and ALPA are going about this in different ways, which I think is positive as well.
I'm sure we have widebody FOs that are making 88k. Those are guys that voluntarily drop their trips to do other things. We have widebody FOs making in excess of 220K, that much is for sure. No matter where you are working, you are doing something extra if you are making that much money. The math doesn't work out otherwise.
This thread is beyond ridiculous...
#54
Brownie, Your an Idiot. Plan and Simple. You know it, and everyone knows it. Hopefully your boyfriend knows it.
Sitting in the back of a Freighter is total Horse Crap. And how you make 220 is a lie. Unless your 15th year pay. which matches FDX. So the Pay is the same. But they have QOL that we will never have with attitudes like yours. You need to raise your self worth.
Sitting in the back of a Freighter is total Horse Crap. And how you make 220 is a lie. Unless your 15th year pay. which matches FDX. So the Pay is the same. But they have QOL that we will never have with attitudes like yours. You need to raise your self worth.
Now go have your glass of wine with your fedex boys and chill.
#55
I'm not going to join the brown vs purple debate. However, there are several ANC FOs on 5/6 year pay that made 180-190 last year. Throw in bidding higher time lines and not conflicting training, vacation or carry in and I could see someone getting close to 220.
#56
#57
Well Nash you can K.M.A for your idiotic response and if u were half as sharp as you claimed you knew that most guys flying across the pond make 200+ on the right seat and the 88k is not the current earning rather thier 4a2b superior alpa negotiated contract. Iam well aware what fedex guys are making.....You just need not to let your typing get ahead of your thinking.
Now go have your glass of wine with your fedex boys and chill.
Now go have your glass of wine with your fedex boys and chill.
I used to always think of UPS guys as my "Brothers in Brown". Knowing how some of you think of us is causing me to re-evaluate my position.
I find it laughable that you are blaming the UPS furlough on FDX ALPA.
As regards the FAA lawsuit: looks like they are saying that it'll be even more expensive to include cargo than orignally thought.
From the above article:
The agency discovered that the cost to the cargo industry was underestimated because some items weren’t included in the analysis, according to an FAA official who wasn’t authorized to provide the information. That may indicate the rule won’t be altered.
Best regards,
Clutch
Last edited by ClutchCargo; 05-20-2012 at 11:01 AM. Reason: added text
#58
One thing is for sure...IPA and Fed Ex ALPA are co-dependents in our respective sure-to get-psychotic contract negotiations. What one gets (primarily whoever settles first) will absolutely affect what the other gets. There's obviously many opinions as to which group could secure a better deal if they were completely independent of the other.
Some of the Fed Ex guys I talk to emphatically state that ALPA will do whatever it has to for IPA to settle first...that it is a lock that Fred would simply agree to IPA+$1 like last time, to assuage the narrow-minded who paste their W2's and first class boarding passes to their foreheads at F Street.
Many at UPS say that we should agree to an interim deal to assure that ALPA goes first, and that with our superior unity leverage that into a better deal.
Most want to definitely wait for the elections to get "serious" about negotiations...but given the state of labor these days one might ask 2012 or 2016.
No matter what, both management groups WILL try to break us ALL in different ways, and IMO there's no sense in breaking ourselves for them.
I'll leave you all with what I think is a pretty true axiom...
Pretty much everything good Fed Ex has is a gift from Fred Smith.
Pretty much everything good UPS has is from battle by IPA.
While in the purely visceral sense it "feels" good to advance through hard fought battle, in the end it's often better to be lucky than good.
#59
From the above article:
The agency discovered that the cost to the cargo industry was underestimated because some items weren’t included in the analysis, according to an FAA official who wasn’t authorized to provide the information. That may indicate the rule won’t be altered.
The agency discovered that the cost to the cargo industry was underestimated because some items weren’t included in the analysis, according to an FAA official who wasn’t authorized to provide the information. That may indicate the rule won’t be altered.
Of course, careful with that logic: if the age 60 rule was pushed to 65 based on 60 being arbitrary and discriminatory, wouldn't any number be arbitrary and discriminatory? Perhaps we should remove the age limit completely.
#60
Are we there yet??!!
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,010
I think the age thing had more to do with the "harmonization" with ICAO than most people realize.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post