Early Survey Results
08-21-2023, 10:21 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Fetal in the hub
Posts: 414
Get mine?! I'd happily compare W-2s for the last 3 years. If you've got evidence of me looking out for myself during negotiations feel free to use the quote feature.
08-22-2023, 03:29 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,126
I voted No. I'm asking questions. I'm listening. I'm unsure of who gets to determine what's "Right" and what's "Wrong", but I am sure that majority rules. If the MEC Leadership and NC committee thought the majority would vote Yes, then they were clearly wrong. That's not an opinion. It's Just a Fact. 
I think generalizing YES voters and/or NO voters doesn't help us collectively move the ball forward, rather it's very important we ALL listen. And, even more important, that the MEC and NC truly listen. Listen to understand, not listen to refute. They claim they are now in the process of doing just that. Let's see.
I would hope we collectively want a TA that passes FAR above the 50% + 1 threshold, because if that's the case then the clear winner is FEDEX management, not the FEDEX pilots. Lets see if/how our MEC Leadership and NC structure the path forward. Let's see the strategy and time line they pursue. While we wait, let's continue to discuss and debate. I believe there are many areas, beyond just pay & retirement, the union will have to revisit and reconsider.
Everyone already understands that TA 1.0 was deemed sufficient by 43% of the pilots. That's not where the MEC & NC need to spend their time & energy. It's the 57% majority that need to be convinced that any TA2.0 is sufficiently better.
The NC will have to admit the negative affects of concessions they agreed to, and then work to eliminate them. They (We) will need to seek more data, more opinions, and gain a broader and deeper understanding of the affects of certain changes. A dismissive attitude clearly didn't work.
Once again, they need to change their feedback loop - listen to understand - not listen to refute. My preference is that it's all done with more civility. Yes, even on APC.
VR (Very Respectfully),
DLax
p.s. We had (...still have) a 99% Strike Vote, let's keep that in mind and get back to that level of unity. Our Leadership and NC specifically told us it was very meaningful and useful.
I think generalizing YES voters and/or NO voters doesn't help us collectively move the ball forward, rather it's very important we ALL listen. And, even more important, that the MEC and NC truly listen. Listen to understand, not listen to refute. They claim they are now in the process of doing just that. Let's see.
I would hope we collectively want a TA that passes FAR above the 50% + 1 threshold, because if that's the case then the clear winner is FEDEX management, not the FEDEX pilots. Lets see if/how our MEC Leadership and NC structure the path forward. Let's see the strategy and time line they pursue. While we wait, let's continue to discuss and debate. I believe there are many areas, beyond just pay & retirement, the union will have to revisit and reconsider.
Everyone already understands that TA 1.0 was deemed sufficient by 43% of the pilots. That's not where the MEC & NC need to spend their time & energy. It's the 57% majority that need to be convinced that any TA2.0 is sufficiently better.
The NC will have to admit the negative affects of concessions they agreed to, and then work to eliminate them. They (We) will need to seek more data, more opinions, and gain a broader and deeper understanding of the affects of certain changes. A dismissive attitude clearly didn't work.
Once again, they need to change their feedback loop - listen to understand - not listen to refute. My preference is that it's all done with more civility. Yes, even on APC.
VR (Very Respectfully),
DLax
p.s. We had (...still have) a 99% Strike Vote, let's keep that in mind and get back to that level of unity. Our Leadership and NC specifically told us it was very meaningful and useful.
08-22-2023, 03:59 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,201
Well not really - we will most likely be starting at zero - based on the work rule improvements that people have vocalized. So you really have to count on all 100% - not just the NO voters - if they turned it around and got, as some on here have suggested, an improvement in scope, inflation adjusted pay rates and zero retirement improvements that may be sufficient for the 57% but doubt it would for the rest. Probably need to accept that it's going to be a long slow fight and we will be starting at zero.
If all true then it looks like any additional bargaining is within/between the crew force, not the company. That mentality would certainly be problematic and prove the point many made on how TA1.0 was bargained.
The MEC could have rejected the TA telling the company it’s insufficient - keep the checkbook open and your curb your desire for scheduling efficiencies, which reduce QOL.
They didn’t, but the majority of the pilots just did.
We’ve been repeatedly told the company looks past the NC & MEC, and directly at the pilots. I think that’s true too. We need to collectively stare back - HARD!
DAL, AA, and soon UAL, have all ratified improved TAs with about 75% of their pilots voting YES. This threshold should be the minimum consensus our membership strives to achieve. Yes, it will take critical internal analysis, open debate, and true unity to achieve it.
Giddy Up! Peak is coming.
VR,
DLax
08-23-2023, 03:39 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
So, your post was making fun of yourself? Doubt it!
08-23-2023, 03:41 AM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
- if they turned it around and got, as some on here have suggested, an improvement in scope, inflation adjusted pay rates and zero retirement improvements that may be sufficient for the 57% but doubt it would for the rest. Probably need to accept that it's going to be a long slow fight and we will be starting at zero.
08-23-2023, 03:48 AM
#86
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
I’m a bit confused. Seems like a zero sum game mentality. Are you implying the company doesn’t need to bring anymore $$ to the table, rather we need to give up portions of the improved retirement in order to get industry pay rates, scope improvements (clarifications), which we’ve been told aren’t truly necessary, and reverse the scheduling/QOL concessions that TA 1.0 gave to the company ??
If all true then it looks like any additional bargaining is within/between the crew force, not the company. That mentality would certainly be problematic and prove the point many made on how TA1.0 was bargained.
The MEC could have rejected the TA telling the company it’s insufficient - keep the checkbook open and your curb your desire for scheduling efficiencies, which reduce QOL.
They didn’t, but the majority of the pilots just did.
We’ve been repeatedly told the company looks past the NC & MEC, and directly at the pilots. I think that’s true too. We need to collectively stare back - HARD!
DAL, AA, and soon UAL, have all ratified improved TAs with about 75% of their pilots voting YES. This threshold should be the minimum consensus our membership strives to achieve. Yes, it will take critical internal analysis, open debate, and true unity to achieve it.
Giddy Up! Peak is coming.
VR,
DLax
If all true then it looks like any additional bargaining is within/between the crew force, not the company. That mentality would certainly be problematic and prove the point many made on how TA1.0 was bargained.
The MEC could have rejected the TA telling the company it’s insufficient - keep the checkbook open and your curb your desire for scheduling efficiencies, which reduce QOL.
They didn’t, but the majority of the pilots just did.
We’ve been repeatedly told the company looks past the NC & MEC, and directly at the pilots. I think that’s true too. We need to collectively stare back - HARD!
DAL, AA, and soon UAL, have all ratified improved TAs with about 75% of their pilots voting YES. This threshold should be the minimum consensus our membership strives to achieve. Yes, it will take critical internal analysis, open debate, and true unity to achieve it.
Giddy Up! Peak is coming.
VR,
DLax
08-23-2023, 04:41 AM
#87
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2021
Posts: 89
You keep talking about peak, yet never give a good reason why this peak is any different than peak 2021 or 2022. Why is this peak different than peak 2004, 2005, 2012, 2013, 2014? We were in negotiations during all of those peaks, and they went by without a TA. Unless you are suggesting that the NMB is going to release us to self help in the next two months, I highly doubt this peak will be any different than the past peaks with the exception of being over manned.
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/wa...-into-2024/amp
08-23-2023, 05:36 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,201
You keep talking about peak, yet never give a good reason why this peak is any different than peak 2021 or 2022. Why is this peak different than peak 2004, 2005, 2012, 2013, 2014? We were in negotiations during all of those peaks, and they went by without a TA. Unless you are suggesting that the NMB is going to release us to self help in the next two months, I highly doubt this peak will be any different than the past peaks with the exception of being over manned.
Why did we ever take a strike vote?
Why does the company ever negotiate?
Is profit only a function of cost, or is revenue from customers a player too?
If “Capitulate Now” is your rallying cry, then yes it doesn’t matter which peak we are discussing.
My preference would have been to apply max pressure this peak, however, our leadership couldn’t risk getting parked by NMB this summer, they took the offer on the table, so we are where we are.
The NMB will expect both parties to continue to negotiate in good faith. The fact TA1.0 failed member ratification does not mean we are failing to do that, rather it means the offer was insufficient and unacceptable to the majority.
The defined process requires member ratification and has steps if that should occur.
Let’s see where we are in 3-6-12-14 months. Patience is still a virtue.
However, we should be crystal clear that our patience is not endless. Precisely why we held a strike vote earlier this year.
VR,
DLax
08-23-2023, 06:30 AM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
In your world, do we ever have any leverage?
Why did we ever take a strike vote?
Why does the company ever negotiate?
Is profit only a function of cost, or is revenue from customers a player too?
If “Capitulate Now” is your rallying cry, then yes it doesn’t matter which peak we are discussing.
My preference would have been to apply max pressure this peak, however, our leadership couldn’t risk getting parked by NMB this summer, they took the offer on the table, so we are where we are.
The NMB will expect both parties to continue to negotiate in good faith. The fact TA1.0 failed member ratification does not mean we are failing to do that, rather it means the offer was insufficient and unacceptable to the majority.
The defined process requires member ratification and has steps if that should occur.
Let’s see where we are in 3-6-12-14 months. Patience is still a virtue.
However, we should be crystal clear that our patience is not endless. Precisely why we held a strike vote earlier this year.
VR,
DLax
Why did we ever take a strike vote?
Why does the company ever negotiate?
Is profit only a function of cost, or is revenue from customers a player too?
If “Capitulate Now” is your rallying cry, then yes it doesn’t matter which peak we are discussing.
My preference would have been to apply max pressure this peak, however, our leadership couldn’t risk getting parked by NMB this summer, they took the offer on the table, so we are where we are.
The NMB will expect both parties to continue to negotiate in good faith. The fact TA1.0 failed member ratification does not mean we are failing to do that, rather it means the offer was insufficient and unacceptable to the majority.
The defined process requires member ratification and has steps if that should occur.
Let’s see where we are in 3-6-12-14 months. Patience is still a virtue.
However, we should be crystal clear that our patience is not endless. Precisely why we held a strike vote earlier this year.
VR,
DLax
1. Yes, we had leverage, we didn't use it.
2. We took a strike vote because there was very little movement by the company and the NMB signaled that they weren't happy with the company's position.
3. The company negotiates because they are requited to under the RLA. If the NMB believes they are not negotiating in good faith, they would release us to self help.
4. There are many items that factor into profit. Profit is a good thing.
So, how do we make it crystal clear that our patience is not endless? When our patience runs out, then what? You do realize that it is up to the NMB, don't you? You do realize that both parties want things in negotiations? We already have more than half of the MEC that is already subject to recall or their terms are ending. So, again, what is special about this peak? If we are still in negotiations 6 months from now, then this peak didn't mean anything different.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
