Originally Posted by
Andy
OK, again. Why not just lower the monthly cap on every pilot so that furloughs wouldn't be necessary? That's the way it USED to be and the way that Southwest still does it.
Or would the pilots rather pay the .25% furloughee medical assessment? ... the good news is that only 1/3 of CAL's pilots voted against the assessment.
Andy,
For starters, the furloughs at CAL were NOT necessary. Stating the obvious, CAL did not park an entire fleet precipitating it's last round of furloughs. As I stated earlier, it was all a posturing from Flight Ops Mgt thus making the furloughee's their pawns. As any CAL pilot would agree, it was ALL BS. At that time, the staffing model could have ridden with the 147 STILL aboard. The Union showed/proved this information ad nauseam supporting that fact.
Since you took time to comment on what I wrote earlier, I'll once again address it for you......"D.F" asked the question/thus he was reminded that CAL-ALPA (via it's voting membership) opted for the assessment, that's WHAT THEY DID for their furloughs. The situation was NOT perfect, but it was something 'they did'. To be clear.....NO one is asking for a 'pat on the back' by voting yes on the assessment, but when 'someone' egregiously offers snide comments, expect to have it addressed. He may not have a flare for the obvious, but the "facts are the facts", apparently that alludes him.
Plain and simple.....
Originally Posted by
dumbfounded
What did the CALALPA do for the furloughed guys - one example would be nice.