Originally Posted by
jj158
The CARES act was introduced in the House on January 24. Am I saying Air Wis/ALPA should have known exactly what was in it? Absolutely not. But ALPA, which represents over 60,000 pilots, probably had an idea of what would be included 7 days before it was signed into law.
You seem to have a very selective memory. At that time we were getting constant emails to push congress to support our industry. Even when the act was signed, the airlines had an application process and there wasn't a clear amount that was going to be paid out to each airline. I highly doubt the company got close to what was needed to cover keeping us all here.
Originally Posted by
jj158
What percentages would you allocate to the pay rates? If you provide some numbers I will update the analysis and repost.
Or can you tell me a better estimate of how much the pilots conceded?
Also, I did not consider that LCAs lost over 15 hours of pay. Their guarantee is typically higher. Since the union said "reduce minimum guarantee to 60" the LCAs had their pay cut by more than 15 hours. Maybe this has been resolved, but last I heard it was not.
Lastly, I did not consider all of the value from the stay at home lines. That saved the company a considerable amount of money as well.
We definitely gave up some pay but that was to keep pilots like you still on property at that time. I asked an LCA friend if he has a higher guarantee in his position and he laughed. With you "always accurate" knowledge of the contract, can you point out where some pilots are given a higher guarantee than the rest of us? They get an additional override when teaching but not more hours. The stay at home lines wasn't a guarantee of money to the company but an optional way for pilots to not have to come in to work and still receive some pay.
Originally Posted by
jj158
Nowhere in here am I demanding that it be paid to furloughed pilots. All I'm saying, since others brought up the concessions, is that the dollar value could bring about 50 pilots back from furlough. It's an option. If it were possible, I would encourage ALPA to put it to a vote. There are lots of options. Would you rather recoup your concessions, pay for all furloughed pilots health insurance, bring only 50 pilots back, etc.? All of these are feasible considering the cost savings that we supplied to the company.
Your line in "findings" showed where you wanted it to be applied and you used inaccurate math to suit your position and as far as I know, it's not even an option anyway. We paid for something in the past and I guess I don't see where we have a right to just take it back - again this is opposite your same claim against the company about bonuses.