Originally Posted by
gettinbumped
Credit where credit is due, sleeves. I disagree with your argument but you have been very civil of late which I appreciate.
In my opinion the 747/777 is NOT a carve out. Any base closing going forward will include the 24 month grandfather rights, regardless of what it is I would bet. The MOU came about because a base closing followed by a re-opening a year later was so bone headed they didn't think of it while negotiating the contract. It causes a huge expensive mess for the company, which they earned. Personally I wish we had let them sit in it and not given them 24 month relief, but it is what it is. Going forward I expect you will see base closings have 24 month recall rights by MOU 14 and regular bumps be covered under Section 8. Unless this ill conceived C171 resolution is adopted
Well stated. If they close iah guppy then absolutely there should be extended rights. That said, if the MEC pursues this resolution, done. I don't think the political or financial capital exists to make it happen, but if it does so be it.
Look, there is a lt of angst going on right now. Look at the junior man list recently posted on the other site. The junior denver 737 cap is over 4000 numbers junior to how the last "bid" went a couple of years ago. There are a bunch of us on the outside looking in...