Council 26 Mike Arcamuzi for Blk 11 Election
10-21-2014, 02:48 PM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Uh, don't know about the rest of you, but I like well paid, happy training force. Make it competitive, and get the guys and gals who want to teach. If there is no advantage to working there, we'll have a room full of Barney Fife's looking to grind their axe.
2006 Contract made training less of a good deal. Right or wrong, their was a perception that they got "left out" on that deal.
Not a flex, LCA, with no intentions of doing the job. Just pointing out this LINE guy likes fat, happy, flexes and LCAs. I figure it works best for everyone….YMMV.
2006 Contract made training less of a good deal. Right or wrong, their was a perception that they got "left out" on that deal.
Not a flex, LCA, with no intentions of doing the job. Just pointing out this LINE guy likes fat, happy, flexes and LCAs. I figure it works best for everyone….YMMV.
10-21-2014, 03:02 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 577
To paraphrase DW, the company would hire DEC for HK if no one bid it. As is allowed by the contract. Then one negotiated by DW. You know, the one where he presciently backed the company into this corner for us.
10-21-2014, 03:27 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Bent Over
Posts: 531
Uh, don't know about the rest of you, but I like well paid, happy training force. Make it competitive, and get the guys and gals who want to teach. If there is no advantage to working there, we'll have a room full of Barney Fife's looking to grind their axe.
2006 Contract made training less of a good deal. Right or wrong, their was a perception that they got "left out" on that deal.
Not a flex, LCA, with no intentions of doing the job. Just pointing out this LINE guy likes fat, happy, flexes and LCAs. I figure it works best for everyone….YMMV.
2006 Contract made training less of a good deal. Right or wrong, their was a perception that they got "left out" on that deal.
Not a flex, LCA, with no intentions of doing the job. Just pointing out this LINE guy likes fat, happy, flexes and LCAs. I figure it works best for everyone….YMMV.
I don't know if I totally agree with you there Albie. Make it too good of a deal and guys will do it just for the money. The worst instructors I ever had anywhere were on the 727. It was obvious that a lot of them were there just for the paycheck and didn't have the skills or temperament to be an instructor.
I think there needs to be a happy medium. Enough to attract guys who really like to teach but not so much that guys will do it just for the extra pay.
10-21-2014, 04:40 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 577
I understand the company wanted more availablitiy from the crews, the company should pay for it. It is cheaper than over hiring to fill the vacancies.
I do get that your spinning things to get those who think like you back in power. This is not a personal attack on you.
It is easy to criticize decisions with hind sight, isn't that what your doing about SS.
Disclaimer: I am not a SS fan. But I do remember the past and how DW treated those not in his special group. Everyone pays dues & everyone should be represented.
10-21-2014, 05:01 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Just like DW said when asked about no one bidding FDAs during the hub turn meeting…. the company will hire those chinese (or was it Irish) pilots to move the freight.
To paraphrase DW, the company would hire DEC for HK if no one bid it. As is allowed by the contract. Then one negotiated by DW. You know, the one where he presciently backed the company into this corner for us.
To paraphrase DW, the company would hire DEC for HK if no one bid it. As is allowed by the contract. Then one negotiated by DW. You know, the one where he presciently backed the company into this corner for us.
Since then the FDAs are suddenly giving us leverage. Never mind we gave them away on the cheap.
This is why people like DW and BC needed to go. They started to believe company threats and were willing to sell out the many to ensure gains for a few.
10-23-2014, 06:31 AM
#56
done, gone skiing
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Rocking chair
Posts: 1,602
Just like DW said when asked about no one bidding FDAs during the hub turn meeting…. the company will hire those chinese (or was it Irish) pilots to move the freight.
To paraphrase DW, the company would hire DEC for HK if no one bid it. As is allowed by the contract. Then one negotiated by DW. You know, the one where he presciently backed the company into this corner for us.
To paraphrase DW, the company would hire DEC for HK if no one bid it. As is allowed by the contract. Then one negotiated by DW. You know, the one where he presciently backed the company into this corner for us.
) could answer. My take in past conversations with Webb or BC (can't remember which) was that the union wanted to get us in, codify our place in doing this flying, and lock in our rights to do so. Keeping the Chinese and Irish out was as important if not more so, than how good a package we could negotiate with Fedex. In negotiations, whether section 6 or LOA's, we have always been behind the 8 ball. Lots of reasons, all spelled out in gory detail on this and other threads in this blog. Whether ALPA could have or should have pushed harder (and its only supposition that it would have been successful), just remember no matter how you voted on the FDA LOA(s), no matter whether the union should have asked/demanded more; remember: NO ONE HAS BEEN FORCED TO BID INTO A FOREIGN DOMICILE .
I feel bad for anyone living in a high cost environment with open, loosely interpreted language dictating lifestyle issues. The LOA's have not been prefect, the union and company, for differing reasons have pushed or accepted improvements. Still, if you don't like or didn't like the terms you could have avoided going.
Caveat emptor
10-23-2014, 08:18 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: FedEx A-300 Captain
Posts: 125
Quote. " Some guys are like birds and you have to throw rocks to get them to fly. Few years ago, I was asked to help on a committee....one of the people talking to me about it claimed one of the benefits was trip removal....I had reservations to begin with.....that sealed the deal I said "no". There are guys out there that look at ALPA as a career alternative to flying, like some look at Management as a career.
..... but if their aspirations is a "counterrevolution" to reinstall the 'rightful heirs' of the previous administration I don't think we have time for that."
Thank you for these poignant thoughts. I could not have written them better myself. Here, here.
..... but if their aspirations is a "counterrevolution" to reinstall the 'rightful heirs' of the previous administration I don't think we have time for that."
Thank you for these poignant thoughts. I could not have written them better myself. Here, here.
10-23-2014, 11:10 AM
#58
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 48
[QUOTE=MaxKts;1750655]
I love it when someone argues with me and they prove my point.
Max, you didn't deny my point, you just said in essence the Flex's deserved it. And you didn't deny that the non-member's were given a free pass.
Though some made a killing, it was because they did a ton of overtime, trading days off for cash. The schoolhouse should be manned higher but it isn't. But your blanket "...the instructors were making almost double..." is nonsense. A few of them did, just like a few WB Capt's do.
That they sleep in their own beds: MINT and Training Scheduling can't put together good commuting schedules. The result is a large pool of qualified people will not apply. So locals do it, and yes they sleep at home. Some do commute though.
The $800-$1100 starting Flex pay has been the same since 1986. That's no typo.
As far as leaving, some did. I did. But the contract change stated 3 months (6 at company discretion) notice was required to be given, versus the previous 1. Your attitude says: if it was so bad, why don't you leave? Nice. WH said that outright, I was there. Good attitude for a Union rep. Would that be something you'd want your Union rep to tell you? Hey, if you don't like your int'l override, don't fly it? If you don't like FDA, don't bid it? If you don't want to DH on a company jet, don't bid those trips? I don't think so.
We're all in this together. Sorry you don't feel that way.
I can't vote for Block 11 any more. But if a Flex votes for M.A., he's a fool.
Max, you didn't deny my point, you just said in essence the Flex's deserved it. And you didn't deny that the non-member's were given a free pass.
Though some made a killing, it was because they did a ton of overtime, trading days off for cash. The schoolhouse should be manned higher but it isn't. But your blanket "...the instructors were making almost double..." is nonsense. A few of them did, just like a few WB Capt's do.
That they sleep in their own beds: MINT and Training Scheduling can't put together good commuting schedules. The result is a large pool of qualified people will not apply. So locals do it, and yes they sleep at home. Some do commute though.
The $800-$1100 starting Flex pay has been the same since 1986. That's no typo.
As far as leaving, some did. I did. But the contract change stated 3 months (6 at company discretion) notice was required to be given, versus the previous 1. Your attitude says: if it was so bad, why don't you leave? Nice. WH said that outright, I was there. Good attitude for a Union rep. Would that be something you'd want your Union rep to tell you? Hey, if you don't like your int'l override, don't fly it? If you don't like FDA, don't bid it? If you don't want to DH on a company jet, don't bid those trips? I don't think so.
We're all in this together. Sorry you don't feel that way.
I can't vote for Block 11 any more. But if a Flex votes for M.A., he's a fool.
10-23-2014, 07:41 PM
#59
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD-11, F/O
Posts: 889
I will add this about the "ARCO" debate. Mike has from the beginning worked endless hours on behalf of Fedex pilots. Yes he is associated with the Webb administration. I won't defend all that has been bannered about about Webb, other than to say that DW is a true unionist knowing all too well that "interest based bargaining" is the ultimate oxymoron.
For those of you not here since pre ALPA 1 and its replacement, FPA to be followed by ALPA 2 (the current); here is a quick history lesson. We have had alternating philosophy's at Fedex starting with "Fred with take care of us....", "We will lose the good will of the company if we unionize...." and any number of similar augments vs "We need a real contract negotiated by a real union".
At this juncture few would argue the need for a RLA sanctioned working agreement (pre union the crew force was pretty evenly divided on even the need for that), but now we have had back and forth, a "work with the company vs go head to head with the company" approach to negotiating with Fedex. Both have failed to conclude a contract with the company in a timely manner. Both advocates for their method of negotiating have had better luck bad mouthing the other camps methods than acutely proving there own in negoiation with Fedex.
So Back to Mike. Mike is old school. He is a true blue unionist, not some pansy apologist who holds his nose over the fact that other groups, be it truckers, teachers or clerks, dare to work under a union label. I don't even have to ask whether Mike is covering up his SEIU logo on his "Contract Now" lanyard, I know he isn't.
I'm not bad mouthing the current administration or how they are interfacing with the company, I'm just saying that ARCO is not Webb but is surely not cut from the same cloth as CC. Read what he has to say and vote for him based on what he saids he will do as an ALPA rep. You may not agree with everything he says but he will work 150% for the pilots of this airline. That I will take to the bank..
For those of you not here since pre ALPA 1 and its replacement, FPA to be followed by ALPA 2 (the current); here is a quick history lesson. We have had alternating philosophy's at Fedex starting with "Fred with take care of us....", "We will lose the good will of the company if we unionize...." and any number of similar augments vs "We need a real contract negotiated by a real union".
At this juncture few would argue the need for a RLA sanctioned working agreement (pre union the crew force was pretty evenly divided on even the need for that), but now we have had back and forth, a "work with the company vs go head to head with the company" approach to negotiating with Fedex. Both have failed to conclude a contract with the company in a timely manner. Both advocates for their method of negotiating have had better luck bad mouthing the other camps methods than acutely proving there own in negoiation with Fedex.
So Back to Mike. Mike is old school. He is a true blue unionist, not some pansy apologist who holds his nose over the fact that other groups, be it truckers, teachers or clerks, dare to work under a union label. I don't even have to ask whether Mike is covering up his SEIU logo on his "Contract Now" lanyard, I know he isn't.
I'm not bad mouthing the current administration or how they are interfacing with the company, I'm just saying that ARCO is not Webb but is surely not cut from the same cloth as CC. Read what he has to say and vote for him based on what he saids he will do as an ALPA rep. You may not agree with everything he says but he will work 150% for the pilots of this airline. That I will take to the bank..
10-24-2014, 06:05 AM
#60
done, gone skiing
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Rocking chair
Posts: 1,602
I respect that you see the Webb administration as a fail. Its very hard to "win" at anything in labor relations, let alone when you represent college educated pilots working for one of the most astute (mostly) non union companies in the country. Mike worked with Webb, Webb was and continues to be a lighting rod of dissent. I would suggest you talk to Mike about his positions, his defense of his past involvement with ALPA and attempting to get a contract that more than a bare majority were willing to vote for.
Working for pilots is a tough, thankless job. Not every decision meets with a unanimous approval nor every decision in hindsight look as good as it should have. I suggest you go right to the source.
Working for pilots is a tough, thankless job. Not every decision meets with a unanimous approval
nor every decision in hindsight look as good as it should have. I suggest you go right to the source.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
