System Bid has been posted
04-18-2023, 10:45 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,236
This is a cynical investor sentiment DRIVEN attempt to inflate the value of FDX stock. Nothing else. All the prognostication about how this will play out is FUD. These system bids are worthless. Trying to forecast your manning levels 24 months out is foolhardy. This is why no one else in the industry does it.
All these management ploys will only ever result in sugar highs for the stock. Wall Street only rewards growth and innovation. Tesla doesn't have to layoff people and play numbers games to increase the value of their stock because they're growing and innovating and their leadership (seems) competent. Their stock price has been stratospheric. Meanwhile back in Memphis.......
Don't make any decisions based on this being the future. The world didn't change in the last 6 months
All these management ploys will only ever result in sugar highs for the stock. Wall Street only rewards growth and innovation. Tesla doesn't have to layoff people and play numbers games to increase the value of their stock because they're growing and innovating and their leadership (seems) competent. Their stock price has been stratospheric. Meanwhile back in Memphis.......
Don't make any decisions based on this being the future. The world didn't change in the last 6 months
04-18-2023, 12:31 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,535
MX,
I looked at your numbers and think I found an error. You show 75FM at 362 for Min/Max Staffing from the FCIF, but then you have 468 immediately below that in both spots. This gives a total of 5624. If you subtract out the extra 106 there you'll get back to the 5518 total I keep coming up with. And, being lazy I hadn't run the numbers in the current staffing levels, I was using the seniority number of 6009 being highest I could find so I had assumed we were 500 over manned. So if 5518 is correct (but maybe it isn't I just don't know where you got the additional numbers), then it looks like the numbers are 298 overstaffed using Min and 28 understaffed using Max.
Gas
I looked at your numbers and think I found an error. You show 75FM at 362 for Min/Max Staffing from the FCIF, but then you have 468 immediately below that in both spots. This gives a total of 5624. If you subtract out the extra 106 there you'll get back to the 5518 total I keep coming up with. And, being lazy I hadn't run the numbers in the current staffing levels, I was using the seniority number of 6009 being highest I could find so I had assumed we were 500 over manned. So if 5518 is correct (but maybe it isn't I just don't know where you got the additional numbers), then it looks like the numbers are 298 overstaffed using Min and 28 understaffed using Max.
Gas
04-18-2023, 01:00 PM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,124
Looking at the SAM, if they train this out then, and we lose 300 retirements (those are minimums) then we'd be 300 pilots less than we are with virtually the same amount of flying. Unless we sold airplanes our crew ratio would start to look more like it did during Covid. You're assuming they get rid of airplanes that they aren't yet planning to get rid of. That could happen or things could pick back up and we could be completely slammed and way undermanned. Either could happen.
we do know
- daytime sort to decrease by large amount due to postal contract changes
- CO intends to use trucks a lot more
- CO intends to use more “partner” life instead or our own jets
- PAC crossings to decrease by 30%
now add all that up and they are certainly saying they intend to greatly REDUCE the amount of freight the airline carries
04-19-2023, 07:53 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,199
And there’s going to be some senior musicians who are about to learn they are not allowed to play.
The rules to this realignment bid will allow the company to abrogate seniority in a manner we’ve never seen before, due to the changes we allowed in the 2015 CBA
Just another example of how much we gave up by voting YES to the 2015 TA version 1.0
History will repeat itself if you/we allow it
In Unity (for eveyone),
DLax
The rules to this realignment bid will allow the company to abrogate seniority in a manner we’ve never seen before, due to the changes we allowed in the 2015 CBA
Just another example of how much we gave up by voting YES to the 2015 TA version 1.0
History will repeat itself if you/we allow it
In Unity (for eveyone),
DLax
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
