Thread: It's Done
View Single Post
Old 10-13-2020 | 05:45 AM
  #45  
BenTover
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Hedley
Lower MPG’s (like those in the LOA) are not a win for anyone. The difference in our block hours in a slow month are not very far off from those in a peak month. The company has always offered more vacation and conducted the bulk of the training during these periods also. The whole migrant worker argument just doesn’t work. If the company could just pay those that they needed to meet the demand for that month then it would, but when they have to pay to carry a bunch of dead weight through the slow periods, the argument falls apart. Migrant workers are paid to harvest the crop and then leave. They aren’t paid to stick around and watch the next crop grow. I looked at this deal as the lesser of two evils, but it is definitely not something that the company would want to keep in a bankruptcy situation.
That makes no sense considering the company is currently utilizing the benefit of a lower MPG. The company is carrying migrant worker dead weight, it’s just costing them a lot less money. Aside from industry downturns, lower MPGs allow the company to shift flying from domicile to domicile without impunity. Case in point, look at the current 8 hr reserve split in MPGs between some domiciles for the same equipment, status, and scale. Even if one accepts your comment on line value variations, the company would love a low MPG for reserves during the spring and fall seasons.

Anyone remember this group?


Boston Consulting Variabilization

Last edited by BenTover; 10-13-2020 at 06:14 AM.
Reply