Originally Posted by
mikea72580
I continue to be frustrated by the MEC publishing biased information that in some cases is purporting incorrect information to be FACTS.
Example- Scope TAJV
Q: How many jobs are we losing in the drop of compliance?
A: Zero jobs will be lost.
Then, below they make the following statement.
"To quantify, worst case scenario, the Company could decrease about 1 transatlantic roundtrip/day from current levels."
Soo......giving up 1 round trip per day would not result in job loses?
Are we operating drones to Europe on 1 round trip/day? Can anyone help me understand how this Q & A is NOT false.
I'm also wondering why they are comparing our CURRENT level of flying to the new proposed TA language without even a mention that our CURRENT level of flying is out of compliance, TA2012: 48.5% CURRENT: 47.7%.
If the purpose of this FAQ email is to help us understand the difference between the current REQUIRED level and the proposed REQUIRED level, why are they using a baseline of the "Out of Compliance" level of flying for comparison? Does anyone else feel like you are being mislead by that inappropriate comparison?
And to clarify, if 47.7%(current actual level) to 46.5%(proposed required level) = 1.2% change is equavilant to 1 transatlantic round trip/day then wouldn't the current TA2012 REQUIRED level of 48.5% to the 46.5% (proposed level) be closer to a daily loss of 2 transatlantic roundtrips/day?
How can we lose these flights and not experience job losses?
Anyone?
We can lose those flights. The company is actually adding 3 new flights to Europe next year so depending on what AF/KLM does will probably be over the 48.5% level.
If you lose actual jobs depends on a bunch of factors. Are the airframes moved to other markets. Would the company have kept the flying and purchased other airframes for other markets. What additional flights does AF/KLM add. Does AK/KLM continue to downsize equipment while Delta upsizes. Does AF/KLM downsize overall. That one would wipe away our floor faster then anything posted. The 650000 would be our only protection in that case.
In the end we could potentially lose a couple of flights to that section. There are rumors that AF wants out of the A380 business as part of a restructuring. That would have a far greater impact on our floor then this contract change. I suspect politics will block them from parking the airframes however if Airbus announces a end to A380 production the political aspect might go away with the airframes.
We stuck with EASK as our primary driver of Atlantic flying so we will live or die by it. In the end the number of jobs we have over the pond will come down to the European economy far more then anything contractual.