Originally Posted by
RJSAviator76
I'm not gonna put much stock into the furlough number speculation.
First, we are in an unprecedented time where the government is mandating people to stay at home. Furthermore, many businesses deemed "non-essential" are not allowed by the government to keep operating. Really strange set of circumstances. The 85-95% drop in bookings is not really surprising.
Second, there is already plenty of anecdotal evidence that a number of medications appear to be effective against this virus, as well as a big push by the population to stop with the lockdowns. These calls will only get louder as the data that suggests far more people have been infected by or exposed to this virus than tested. This won't stop the screeching from those who are addicted to fear porn, and those who are politically and emotionally-driven especially in the election year, but at some point, the reality will have to set in. When that's done, the investigations, commissions and committees investigating just how did we bungle this whole thing up and literally destroyed our economy to protect a fraction of the population amounting to a fraction of a single percentage point will surely be entertaining to watch.
Third, Southwest is the opportunistic company with the best balance sheet in the industry. Furloughing 3000-5000 pilots literally handicaps the hell out of this company. Want to move into a market? Nope, sorry... no pilots. Bear in mind, this isn't US Air back in the day. Southwest isn't hanging by the thread because it's been grossly mismanaged on a big scale and cannot get any financing because it's already drowning in debt. Southwest also doesn't outsource any of its flying to a regional subcontractor, let alone almost half like some legacies do. In other words, to maintain a market share, a legacy can put an RJ and furlough at mainline with someone like Alaska being able to do this indefinitely since no caps on RJ flying. On the other hand, Southwest have to pull out of the market altogether. Does Gary want to do this to the tune of 3000-5000 pilots?
Fourth, despite grossly deviating from the historical manning norms, the ones who have been complaining about it the loudest have been the pilots - not the company. Note that despite that, we had the largest PS pie to split. Granted, not the percentage, but the overall pie, and this is despite the deliberate overmanning. Furlough 3000-5000 to get to what level and for what purpose?
In closing, I'm gonna stick to flying a jet and keep looking for things outside of this industry to supplement and and possibly replace my airline income and let the C-suite do the C-suite stuff.
Good post and I sincerely hope that you're right. No way to know what they'll do. They don't have a cost problem, they have a revenue problem. Cutting to zero won't solve that.
However preservation of cash should be an imperative. That's where there is value in ETOs, temporarily lowered guarantee, etc. - at least from the company's perspective, they bleed a little slower which could theoretically leave us stronger going into a recovery (if there is one before we run out of $$)
What I wish we could see on the Facebook page is date of hire or, even better, relative position on the seniority list for each poster. Because if someone is trying to stick it to the junior pilots, it's helpful to know whether they are junior themselves, or insulated from furlough and just don't want their QOL to change.
I can't speak for anyone else, but when a fellow junior pilot says "no concessions", I have no issue with their opinion on the topic. But when a senior captain says "no concessions" it bugs me that they're unwilling to share in the sacrifice as junior pilots end up on the street.
It's a perception problem that I'm having, and I understand that it makes little sense. I think everybody's emotions are just under the surface right now and senior guys who aren't willing to do anything to prevent a furlough trigger me right now.
I'd also like to add my opinion to this "too big to fail" notion I've been seeing going around lately. We are not a business travelers airline. Even before Covid19 we didn't have the network strength, the frequency, or the international to serve business travelers. So when it comes time for the government to choose winners and losers, I think they're going to choose the company that has the most comprehensive network (including regional feed to small and midsize communities we don't serve) plus international.
Just devils advocate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk