FDX 2003 hiring

[F18-FDX]

Almost right. Basically, alot of guys are thinking about retiring early because they don't want to go through an ugly contract negotiation, but not because they they are worried about destroying the company they built. Call me an optimist, but I don't think that will happen, it's not in anybody's interest. If that happened, their retirement would be gone except for the 401K and B plan, it would be in their interest to stick around and make sure it didn't happen. I think you're right in that some don't want to see the union play hard ball with the company "they built" to get what we deserve, but honestly, I don't think anybody is realistically worried about the company folding. Things could get ugly though, that's for sure, and the guys I've talked to just don't want to go through it again (will most likely be alot worse than the last).

I'm not sure where you saw that graph, but a recent study was published in the AARP journal with the same results, but it had NOTHING to do with working the graveyard shift, it was general and generic of all professions. I was intersted in it because my Dad has been planning to retire, but continues to work because he enjoys it. The basic gist was that for every year a person works after 55 takes 2 years and some change off your lifespan. Maybe someone with an agenda re-published it?

 

[active_herk]

FYI, when FedEx got the domestic contract no extra lift (airplanes) were really added to meet the need, just another 500 pilots to fly the airplanes during the day. I think the same goes for the International contract, alot more pilots and just a little more lift.

PurpleTail, I believe you may be slightly mistaken with this statement. I don't know what the international contract will imply with regards to flying (assuming we get it), but with the understanding that it would be primarily widebody flying over the pond, unless we are using capacity on trips already in operation, we WILL definitely need more aircraft. Unlike the 727, which sat dormant throughout the day before the postal contract, from what I've seen, the MD-11s are constantly on the move, stopping only long enough at a base to off/onload cargo and fuel and change the crew. Since the rumor is we will need more pilots to fulfill the international postal contract, we will also be doing more flying, and that would mean we will need more airplanes, which is always a good thing.

 

[PurpleInMEM]

IMHO its only about the $$$

What the heck I'll throw in my ramblings too...

First off, the way I understand the international mail contract doesn't lend itself to FedEx making huge capital investments in airplanes. FedEx sells available international positions on our MD-11's to freight forwarders. Freight forwarders pay a rate per pound (or per cube, ton, etc.) that they negotiate. International mail will simply take up space that FedEx had previously sold to freight forwarders but at a substantially higher and guaranteed yield because the negotiated rates are long term and more or less fixed (not to mention paid for by Uncle Sugar). Of course this begs the question; what about the freight left behind that we used to fly at lower yields? I guess this could be construed as growth potential. However it's not organic FedEx Express Freighter cargo and it's not mail (unless it's overflow). Stability and yield will dictate IF and WHEN MD-11's need to be added to the international fleet. Personally I don't honestly think it's going to be enough to drive a large fleet expansion for freight that has a volatile and uncertain yield.

Second, until there's another bid announcement, adding more Boeing S/O's doesn't do much other than diluting an already low RLG/BLG. Maybe someone will come to the conclusion that newhires should be sentenced to the MD-11....but I'm not holding my breath. Also I've heard some ACP mention that the next bid will only be a cleanup for LA. I read this to mean that it will be even more senior than the last bid, which won't account for much seat movement at the bilge levels of the company.

But I could be wrong....

As far as the next contract....well lets just say that I've kept up face time at my part-time gig. Never know when you'll need another source of income. It won't be an easy thing, but then again it's not supposed to be.

 

[active_herk]

PurpleinMEM - Good points. Like I said in my previous post, I'm not sure what the international postal contract will be composed of, but your interpretation seems to make sense. If the rumors hold true, however, and the company is looking to hire more pilots for the postal contract, in my opinion, that would mean they are looking for more people to fill the lines for more flying. I only meant to say that if they plan to do more flying in the MD-11, they will need more airplanes; the airplanes we have now are already working around the clock.

As far as hiring new hires into the MD-11, I'm not so sure the company would do it. It would be a huge gamble on the part of a new hire to go to that seat. As a newbie on probation, you have to keep your nose clean, and subjecting yourself to a type rating during your first year could be career suicide if things don't work out. I don't mean to say a new guy (or gal) couldn't get through training, I'm only saying that if they didn't, they could be setting themselves up for a very bad situation if they didn't make it as a new hire. I personnally know of at least five guys who either failed their type ride or required extra training during MD-11 school to get through the program. I don't know if any of this is due to increased scrutinity due to the TLH accident, but I do know that training definitely isn't any "guarantee".

As an aside, I recently flew with an LAX based Capt, and the rumor is that LAX will grow from double its present size (on the low side) to as many as 500 pilots. Wouldn't that be something! Anyway, if there is one thing I've learned, its that until you actually see an airplane on the ramp painted in FedEx purple, its just a rumor. We shall all see what happens when the time comes.

Regarding the next contract. Who knows what is going to happen, it definitely is up in the air at this point. If the baseball style arbitration gets passed, it will be very interesting indeed.

 

[F18-FDX]

Very true, now let me jump on a political soapbox for a minute: To re-emphasize active herk's point, if the proposed senate bill on baseball style arbitration passes, we (meaning ALL pilots at all companies, not just FedEx) are in deep sh_t. This bill could have a DEVASTATING affect on our careers, earnings and our families. If you're not familiar with it, it would allow an arbitrator to pick one side's proposal (i.e. management's) over the other's and make it stick. It takes away our right to vote on contracts and even denies our right to strike! This is a Republican bill and has been pushed by all major airline CEOs (gee, I wonder why). These guys have massive political lobbying clout and are buying votes. Obviously with the results of last week's elections, it has a realistic chance of passing.

My point, you ask? If you have not already done so, every pilot needs to CONTACT YOUR SENATORS IMMEDIATELY! It is extremely EASY, especially if you are an ALPA member. If you're not an ALPA member, go to www.congress.org, put in your zip code at the top of the page, then select "write all your elected officials with one click." If you are an ALPA member, log in to the website and click on the "Airline Labor Dispute Resolution Act" icon in the middle of the page, then click on "ACTION ALERT." Type in your zip code and this allows you to shotgun out e-mails to your senators in one easy step, there's even a sample e-mail if you elect to use it. Either of these take less than 5 minutes, you don't have to write an essay, just urge your Senators to oppose S. 1327, the Airline Labor Dispute Resolution Act. Let them know that their decision will affect your next vote for, or against them. I have written several times and will continue to do so because my Republican Senators keep writing me back with their party line of how good this bill is.

This issue is TOO IMPORTANT to our futures to not take the few minutes required to let your voice be heard. ...Now that I've finished writing all this that has nothing to do with the original subject, maybe I should have just started a new thread. Maybe I'll do that too!

 

[AlbieF15]

F18FDX,

I will do as you recommended...our MEC has been asking us to do this for some time.

My question to all you smart guys...why is arbitration so bad? I'm new to this whole gig...but it seems like some at FDX are afraid the company will try to take us "backwards" on the next contract.

Since our company has been so profitable, and other industry contracts (DAL, UAL, and likely soon UPS) are higher than ours, why are we so afraid an arbitrator will find with the company? If we were to ask for current work rules, tweak a few rules here and there, and then tag on an X percentage raise across the board (to either come close to matching/matching/blowing away the UAL/DAL numbers (circle one as appropriate)).

With the tremendous financial success of our business, especially verses the tumultuous pax business, I cannot believe the company could "poor mouth" its way into any significant concessions. Unless the artbitrator was crooked, he'd have to just roll his eyes and say "YGTBSM!" if FDX tried to take back wages/benefits after the continued growth and US Mail contract recently awarded.

As for losing the ability to strike...well....I heard a captain say once that once off the property, we can't do anything to affect profitablity. However...other airlines have shown what slowdowns, etc can do to a bottom line, and in a time critical arena like ours I'm sure there are legal labor actions that can still flex labor's muscle a bit. I'm not advocating anything against the railway act here, just wanting some input some from more senior guys on why this is such a bad piece of prosposed law. Maybe one of you more experienced types (UAL78, Profile?) can start a new thread with some insight.

 

[F18-FDX]

Albie,

I just started a new thread, so hopefully it will generate some discussion. Arbitration in and of itself isn't bad, but this new legislation's “last offer” binding arbitration on contract negotiations is. I'm fairly new to the whole arbitration thing myself, so I'm obviously not an authority, but my feeble mind does see a few significant problems with this legislation:

1) If it comes to the point where an arbitrator makes the decision, with this new legislation it becomes an "all or nothing" decision. The way I understand it, he can either he choose management's offer, or ours, no more "mixing & matching" of good points from both sides. Therefore, if he chose management's offer, that's it, period, end of discussion. We are stuck with whatever works rules, rigs, etc. appear in their offer. And we can't strike! This could have terrible consequences at any airline.

2) Here's the real problem for us at FedEx, and the reason Fred is so high on this new legislation. Our pay would have to be averaged with those of "like" companies, i.e. we could obligated to get the average of companies like Airborne, Atlas, Gemini, etc. NOT UAL, DAL, AAL. Obviously, in many ways we are more similar to the PAX carriers than some of the cargo guys, but this legislation would obligate our pay discussions into the "cargo realm" and could be used to effectively "bring us backwards", or at the very most, not much forward - give up any hope of an industry leading or even equaling contract. This could really screw UPS as well; in the same way it would screw us.

I may be AFU, but I think this could crush any pilot group at any company. As you mentioned, hopefully some senior guys will chime in on the new thread.

 

[Gumbydammit]

Once again Albie makes a good point...
I am by no means experienced in this area, but it would seem to me that FDX is in a much better position than many of the pilot groups if and when arbitration does pass. The work rules and retirement seem to be really good at FDX...the only weak point seems to be pay. Now that UAL and DAL have raised the bar, FDX just needs to get parity on that front...very hard for management to argue against parity when FDX is outstripping all the airlines for profit/growth and their pilots are flying on the backside of the clock. Also, when you're carrying US mail, it would be hard for a republican to NOT step in and end any FDX strike...so losing the ability to strike is not a huge loss since you may not really be able to do that now at FDX for very long anyway.
HOWEVER, long-term, i think F18FDX is right...this is disastrous for pay growth since we are all working together contract to contract. I mean would DAL have anything close to what they got without UAL first raising the bar?

 

[F18-FDX]

Gumby,

You are right in that our work rules, retirement and vacation are good and that FDX is in a great position because we are making money, bigtime, while the PAX guys are doing just the opposite. But my point is that won't help us at all if we can't compare ourselves to UAL and DAL for compensation, but per the legislation get stuck with an average of the cargo folks above.

The current Railway Labor Act allows us to negotiate, the new legislation will destroy ANY pilot group's ability to negotiate a fair contract:

1) We'll get screwed by not being able to negotiate higher compensation, and
2) The PAX guys will get screwed by not being able to negotiate work rules, retirement, etc.

 

[active_herk]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the stipulations I heard regarding the binding arbitration is that when the arbitartor looks over the two contracts, if it is deemed that the one the union offers would cause the company to lose money, that offer would automatically not be chosen. In other words, the company must still be able to post a profit under the union's proposed contract in order for it to be considered by the arbitrator.

Now I don't have a problem with the company making money, I would hope that they would. My problem is that a company can almost ALWAYS show (on paper at least) that they are not making money. If this is so, the union would lose every time. As a case in point, isn't it interesting how the profit sharing program for employees at FedEx has been suspended for over a year and a half now (fortunatley pilots aren't part of this program), but at the same time all the senior managers at FedEx got fairly substantial bonuses last year. Kind of makes you think doesn't it?