I tend to see it both ways too. I made the same comment when I was furloughed from a previous airline and was soundly ridiculed for being naive. The other way to view it is furloughees are hostages to the company, and will force the hand of the union for contract concessions. But then again, furloughs are an economic reality. if I get furloughed again, I'd probably call it quits and start something else (what was the number of that trucking school?)

So for a company that's still making money (although the stock's taking a beating) to threaten furloughs for paycuts is disingenuous. Just make it a separate issue and quit yanking us around. You want paycuts? We've already given 'em. You wanna furlough? Prove that you don't need us, and it's cheaper to let us go. (i.e. retraining, relocation, and D/H crews all over to make up for the shortfalls)

And, you don't wanna work with us to mitigate the overmanning? Fine, we won't work with you. That goes both ways...