Originally Posted by
CaptCoolHand
Profits do not cause furloughs...
Not at all.
And i think you know that’s not what he’s saying.
Delta. The “gold standard” of PS has a profit sharing model that was negotiated in BK. During a time of many furloughs. They were able to maintain that PS in the last round of negotiations due to a no vote and renegotiation.
Times are different. Companies are different. We could have voted no until we got every single thing we wanted. Every one. We’d never leave negotiations.
Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....
He is absolutely linking PS to furloughs. And they are absolutely not related.
AA/US furloughed a lot: bad PS.
SWA hasn’t furloughed: decent PS
JB hasn’t furloughed: used to have good PS
PS has zero to do with furloughs. And HB said they do. I called him out.
I see you changed your post, but you are still somewhat conflating my statement that PS/furloughs aren’t related with a yes/no/74%/negotiations argument. My stance on my post you replied to is purely debunking a PS-furlough correlation/causation argument that HB made. And if you don’t see he clearly said that...well...sorry for ya, but a back and forth about something unrelated won’t be productive. If you want to start a separate thread on yes vs no or 74% or how we got shafted with our PS and how DL got theirs, then fine. But this has already gotten off topic, I just wanted to set the record straight for ol hyper that us getting PS is in no way related to us getting furloughed, as he implied in his post.