Freight DogsFinally a forum for those midnight prowler types who utilise the unglamorous parts of airports that many of us never get to see. Freight Dogs is for pilots and crew who operate mostly without SLF.
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
I think Belgium law is in your favour any way, you may even get a full 4 years salary in payout, or more. Your signature on that piece of paper is going to be worth a lot to them, more than you would believe.
If your scenario is anywhere near correct ,I think most employees are fresh out of luck. Up until last year it indeed used to be so that an employee with a substantial amount of years of service with a Belgium based contract can get a lot of months of pay when the contract is prematurely terminated, even better with mass layoff scenario's.
But all that has changed dramatically last year, now I believe it is severely capped, the only way they would get such high payout is when they come to an agreement with UPS .
AMSTERDAM -(Dow Jones)- Dutch package shipper TNT Express NV (TNTE.AE) Tuesday denied a report about the potential loss of up to 20,000 jobs following the takeover by U.S.-based United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS).
"It's too early to comment about possible job losses," said Job van Harmelen, spokesman at TNT Express. He added the number of potential job losses mentioned in Dutch daily Het Financieele Dagblad makes no sense.
On Monday, UPS, the world's largest international package shipper by revenue ahead of FedEx Corp. (FDX), said it has agreed to buy smaller rival TNT Express in an all-cash deal valuing the Dutch package shipper at EUR5.16 billion ($6.80 billion).
According to the newspaper, Chief executive Marie-Christine Lombard said that while there are few concrete agreements about labor aspects, the loss of up to 20,000 jobs is possible. She added that part of the agreement is that potential lay-offs would be evenly spread between TNT and UPS. TNT has a total of 77,000 employees.
Paste these coordinates into your Google Maps browser to catch a glimpse of what LGG may look like in a few years: 39 54 28.1 n 84 13 53.7 w
This is the empty shell which remains from a once bustling international air network sort facility which handled +100 aircraft and millions of pounds of shipments every night. UPS purchased and absorbed the shipping company and dropped their subcontracted airlines (including the largest one which was wholly owned by the acquired shipping company) like a bag full of rusty hammers.
You are referring to Menlo. UPS purchased Menlo and it did not include an airline. You are confusing Menlo with Emery Worldwide. Emery Worldwide Airlines got it's FAA certificate revoked for numerous maintenance violations.
Emery changed it's name to Menlo and continued ops without a wholly owned airline and instead, relied solely on contractors for lift. UPS purchased Menlo and closed the DAY sort and built heavy freight sorts at it's own hubs around the system. It also cancelled the ACMI contracts with the Menlo contractors and transferred all the volume in house to UPS Airlines as required by the UPS/IPA contract. What's your point in all this? You expect the IPA to allow other operators to fly UPS volume on routes that UPS Airlines can legally fly?
The acquisition of Emery Worldwide by UPS did not include Emery Worldwide Airlines just as the acquisition of TNT Express NV by UPS will not include TNT Airways. You are confused if you believe that Emery and Menlo were different entities somehow (go to Emery Worldwide Freight Services - UPS Supply Chain Solutions). Emery Worldwide Airlines got it’s FAA operating certificate revoked because it made the acquisition simpler and enhanced value for both parties in the transaction (think Babbit’s DUI and the Cargo Carve-Out).
The relationship between Emery Worldwide Airlines to Menlo/Emery was no different than the relationship between UPS to UPS Airlines or TNT Express NV to TNT Airways. UPS doesn’t want or need TNT Airways and existing treaties and laws would prohibit the acquisition and outright foreign ownership of an EU airline. I expect the IPA and/or UPS to allow other operators to fly UPS volume as allowed by their agreement. My point is that eventually the TNT volume will be UPS volume in the UPS network and TNT Airways will probably either cease to exist (like Emery Worldwide Airlines) or look very different (like Challenge/Centurion) in a few years.
HBB if that isn't gloating what is it. It is grossly unfair that N reg acft can fly unhindered round Europe when European reg'd acft cannot do the same in the US. UPS can buy 100% of TNT but TNT would only have been able to buy 49% of UPS. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few months/years.
Whilst that may be considered gloating, I must say your quote is misleading. N reg A/C simply can not fly "unhindered" around Europe. Cabotage is alive and well and the likes of UPS have up to 20 departures a night from CGN flown by Star Airlines because the EU rules wont allow the city pairs to be flown by Brown tails, or US pilots. While UPS may own 100% of any European company, they may NOT own any more than 49% of any European airline, BIG difference.
This was proved quite blatantly by the Brits when Balpa balked at Atlas Air doing the flying for BA.
The result was 3 744's and all the job growth going from Atlas to AACS in STN just to cater to one customer. The A/C were put on the UK register preventing any US pilot from operating them. Upwards of 100 "commands" were shifted from the US to the UK, and they are still there in the guise of GSS, with the first three dash-8's that Atlas ordered going to GSS. So this "unfairness" can go both ways.
I certainly do agree however, that the next few months will be interesting, and in the end, it really is a business decision, irregardless of which side of the Atlantic it comes from.
Someone's counting chickens before the eggs hatch!
I don't know BrowntailWhale, nor will I speak for him. I don't even know if he really IS a line UPS pilot or management. That said, as a 21 year plus UPS line Captain I can safely say he does not represent the typical UPS pilot's attitude towards our recent TNT acquisition announcement.
First of all, NO UPS pilot knows what the ramifications of this acquisition means for our flying or staffing. UPS has kept the pilots represented by the IPA (my union) totally in the dark. We took no active roll in these negotiations, and UPS really isn't interested in our opinions or desires. UPS only gave the IPA the minimum notice required by our contract once the purchase agreement was accepted.
Integrating the TNT system into the UPS system will undoubtably be an extremely complicated logistical, financial, and legal maze. The complexity associated with standing 3rd and 5th freedom rights, coupled with the depressed EC economic engine could lead to LESS UPS flying for all anyone knows (politically, how easy of a sell would it be for an EU politician to change the rules, eliminating intra-European N-number flying by IPA crews??)
The track record for pilots surviving a UPS acquisition is poor. Our purchase of Challenge Air Cargo was (from the line UPS pilots perspective) messy at best. We only bought the that company for their landing rights in South and Central America. The pilots were non-union, and their leased aircraft returned. UPS didn't even offer any of their pilots job interview preference. I was embarrassed.
This acquisition of TNT by UPS will affect many thousands of employees, families, sub-contractors, etc. Some may come out ahead, but a lot may not. Only time will tell. But UPS Corporate has determined this to be the best course to expand our branded service in not only Europe, but also Asia, South America, and India. It is the biggest piece of the worldwide logistics puzzle we've purchased, and hopefully will mean more jobs for more people as our international system becomes more interconnected.
For any pilot to brashly exclaim glee over possible expanded international flying at this point, is simply throwing out flame bait, an opinion based upon a vacuum of facts. If I had made such a statement in haste, I would whole-heartedly apologize to everyone on this forum. This type of attitude does not represent a line UPS/IPA pilot.
This completes my once per year posting on this forum…..
The FACT is that the typical UPS/IPA pilot wants IPA crewmembers flying every route that they can get in browntail aircraft. If they say otherwise, they are either lying, trying to be PC and not offend TNT pilots or simply an idiot.
If you consider it "glee", then so be it. I'm excited at the probability of increased intra Europe flying for UPS/IPA crewmembers. I'm truly sorry that TNT Airways pilots will probably get hosed, but their own company was going to hose them anyway. But it's a dog eat dog world and I want UPS/IPA as the top dog.
Lots of talk about UPS buying TNT on the line and crew rooms, but none of us have a clue about what could/will happen. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we lose flying over this. I surely hope not, but hopefully everybody realizes that UPS doesn't tell us anything. They don't want our opinions either. Our union was notified a couple hours before it was made public.
Anybody coming on any of these anonymous boards claiming to be a UPS/IPA pilot and gloating about it is blowing smoke. Trust me! We have no idea and it could just as easily be bad for us too.
As mentioned before, I hope that this leads to more flying jobs for everybody and nobody gets the shaft.
Keep in mind that our relationship with our company is about as cozy as yours. They don't tell us anything, and all we have is our contract.
Good luck to all, and keep in mind that you never really know who is who on these boards. Nobody that I've chatted with over the last few days is gloating over here at UPS.
Correct me if I´m wrong, but isn´t it, that UPS can´t buy TNT airways to 100% and keep their right to fly intereuropean (better said. 2 landings within one country). As far as I know, they can only own 49%.
According to AirCargoNews DHL already went to the european antitrust watchdog. UPS is confident to get the approval, but some predict that they have to sell some of their european assets (whatever that will be).
So long. Let´s hope it all works out to the best for TNT, UPS and the european partners (StarAir, Farnair, West Air and so on)
The result was 3 744's and all the job growth going from Atlas to AACS in STN just to cater to one customer. The A/C were put on the UK register preventing any US pilot from operating them. Upwards of 100 "commands" were shifted from the US to the UK, and they are still there in the guise of GSS, with the first three dash-8's that Atlas ordered going to GSS.
So this "unfairness" can go both ways.
I don't think you'll find the aircraft were put on the UK register to "prevent any US pilot from operating them".
BAWC and Atlas got away with it for a while because there was no comparible equipment to use on the UK register. Then came AFX. Ok, a 747 Classic but close enough to the CAA (and BALPA!) Therefore, BAWC had a choice. Go with AFX or do something about it. Hence the birth of the "virtual airline" that is GSS. We all know it's a flag of convenience for BAWC and Atlas, However GSS is a UK AOC holder and therefore should be operated by GSS pilots, along with the BA secondees (that's another bone of contention)
Seems like you want to have your cake and eat it
Last edited by Flightmech; 21st Mar 2012 at 10:15.
Sorry guys but this is the way business is done in the US
You are talking about Europe/Belgium/Netherlands. Welcome to our legislation. Your story would end with all letters with proposed bonusses being thrown away because everybody knows it's illegal. All redundancies would become illegal at that point as well.
I don't underestimate the UPS lawyers in any way. I reacted to the story you wrote where employees would "out of the blue" be faced with a letter to "sign or fear the result".
Depending on the number of redundancies, the "path to follow" is clearly written down. Belgium has had a number of these big closures in the past. Try google "law renault". Depending on the % of employees to be made redundant, the plans have to be announced well in advance, leading to social debates about how many, how, etc...