Technically speaking since FDX does in fact lease the aircraft to to our feeders, we could attempt similar mitigation strategies. However I was really only trying to answer your question about whether or carriers have attempted to find ways to mitigate furloughs contractually or not. I don't have a problem with the 4.a.2.b concept just the way the language was written. It's not the only area I feel that way about, but it's obviously the one that is carrying the day right now. ALPA and the FPA are responsible for the language, all I was trying to say was that I think the ALPA lawyers do a better job at writing language than the FPA ones. Whether they are used for that or not is up to our MC/MEC.
I do not think 4A2b is permanent but I think the company's new manning model is.
I agree, but I think we have a lot of people who won't truly understand that until things are back to 'normal'. There are still a fair number of people who think the changes brought about by an extraordinary confluence of events are extraordinary as well. 'They never used to do xyx,' can often be heard out there. Well they do now. New day, new jet.
I would imagine that all sorts of things, including the ones you mentioned are being tossed around as part of cleaning up the 4.a.2.b language. Probably on both sides of the fence too as arbitrators tend to rule in a way that makes everybody unhappy. FDX likes strong control of everything(see ASAP) so while I'm sure they're more than willing to drag this out as long as possible, they'd probably prefer a settlement where the terms are known vs. an imposed one.