Originally Posted by
Razorback flyer
I for one am in favor of the flow throughs. I watched this recession unfold from less than 50 seats from the bottom of the list, and I think the flow is probably one of the things that kept me employed.
I probably would not have flowed, had a furlough come to pass. My wife would have made more going back to work than I would as a compass FO. But I do believe the THREAT of the cost of me flowing back was a factor in me keeping my job.
I think the upflow should be honored for those who are currently on (Compass) property. Its the right thing to do.
I also think if the flow is terminated, we need to stick to our guns on the 85 jet cap. You agreed to it, you honor it. Personally, I think management will view loosing those seats as higher cost than keeping the flowdown.
That may be true, imo. Why press to test on a flow down when you will be entering a growth phase. (No reason to cancel or create leverage for a clause in the contract that will not be invoked) It may be seen as poor man's fragmentation language. If those jets are sold out from underneath the DCI moniker, legally speaking we could contest a right to those seat even though the are not flying for DCI. Just a thought.
So the prudent thing is to ask why? (Do they want to sunset all of them, up and down, or just up? Answer that and the sight picture may become clearer)