I spoke to RZ about it and though his answer may have been "PR" vs. reality he says they have gotten decent response from the LOAs and they are seriously considering not furloughing because it blew up in their faces in 2006. The powers that be are of the opinion that it might be cheaper for the company to remain overstaffed and let attrition level out the staffing over time (apparently people are still leaving, though not as the same rate - many are going to fractionals) than to furlough folks and risk a repeat of last time. He also mentioned that the overstaffing right now is more on the FO side than the CA side. Though there is a slight surplus of captains it isn't that bad. But we'd be pretty fat on FOs. The positive side to this is that if some were let go, the number of CAs downgraded probably wouldn't be many at all, a good thing for all of us.

Also, apparently it is cheaper to park some of our risk flying while oil is high than it is to fly the flights. Parking an airplane and still paying the lease is better than flying it full of pax and bleeding money.

Thats all I have. Basically nothing at all.