View Single Post
Old 05-31-2012 | 08:50 PM
  #2  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
80ktsClamp
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by Scoop
Guys from the NN on work-rules:

"These changes will likely result in a contractual staffing reduction of approximately 300 pilots. However, the Pilot Retirement Medical Account Program (See Negotiators’ Notepad 12-07) and other changes to the PWA such as the increases to the staffing formula and to vacation and CQ training pay are expected to more than compensate for
this reduction."


While this is written to look neutral it is a big negative in my opinion. If nothing changed we would all advance accordingly when these "300" guys retired. It may not have be for 2 or three years but the advancement would then be a permanent improvement.

Now it will take approximately 300 retirees to just break even and we will "lose" the same advancement when those 300 guys would have retired in two or three years.

Am I making a mistake in my logic, or is trading productivity for an early retirement program a big loser in the long term?


Scoop
I was actually pondering over this exact same thing earlier today... and came to the identical conclusion.

It's a very simple deduction and only takes one step back to see the big picture.