Originally Posted by captnate702 (Post 3116043)

Could you imagine AIS trying to navigate overnights or multi-day trips? The entire system would probably just collapse... lots of overnights, etc. would be a total cluster.

Originally Posted by skydisaster (Post 3115919)

I have had this thought for a while. I do believe that is probably where the 275 number comes from. Here is why I don’t believe the company will go there

- 57 of the FOs in those bases are not in the 275 number. That means that the company will only save displacement costs on less than 100 pilots out of the 275 furloughs.

- it will then incur displacements costs on vast numbers of pilots. Think about a base like BLI or LAX. Most of those captains range from super senior to moderately senior. They will displace throughout the System.

- Many of the captains in the bases on your list upgraded out of the big bases, and many of those still commute. Most of them will bid displace back to FO in their big base. This will push existing FOs our to other bases.

- The small bases for more east coast flying than West. This will mean that while IWA and LAS would see small size increases, the bulk of the big base size increase would be in FL. This means more senior FOs being displaced to FL baes when the former captains downgrade back to their home base.

- Re-training requirements after recall are the same if the furlough lasts 1 day or 364 days, so a 1 month furlough to reset the bases won’t happen. It would be a year furlough.

This is all conjecture, so it’s not worth much, but it’s my thoughts on the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Jim Rockford (Post 3115878)

Allegiant will furlough the 275 so they can bump and flush out the smaller bases without incurring as large of a displacement bill (about 1/2 savings) and then bring them back online to the larger bases when needed.

BLI 23
LAX 32
IND 27
VPS 27
PIT 24
GRR 31
TYS 26
AVL 29
BNA 21
SAV 15
ABE 17

TOTAL 272

All thats left: LAS, IWA, CVG, SFB, PIE, PGD, FLL.

To obvious?

Originally Posted by skydisaster (Post 3115919)

I have had this thought for a while. I do believe that is probably where the 275 number comes from. Here is why I don’t believe the company will go there

- 57 of the FOs in those bases are not in the 275 number. That means that the company will only save displacement costs on less than 100 pilots out of the 275 furloughs.

- it will then incur displacements costs on vast numbers of pilots. Think about a base like BLI or LAX. Most of those captains range from super senior to moderately senior. They will displace throughout the System.

- Many of the captains in the bases on your list upgraded out of the big bases, and many of those still commute. Most of them will bid displace back to FO in their big base. This will push existing FOs our to other bases.

- The small bases for more east coast flying than West. This will mean that while IWA and LAS would see small size increases, the bulk of the big base size increase would be in FL. This means more senior FOs being displaced to FL baes when the former captains downgrade back to their home base.

- Re-training requirements after recall are the same if the furlough lasts 1 day or 364 days, so a 1 month furlough to reset the bases won’t happen. It would be a year furlough.

This is all conjecture, so it’s not worth much, but it’s my thoughts on the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw (Post 3116503)

That's a great conspiracy theory, but you give them too much credit to come up with such an intricate plan. If they closed that many bases it would create total chaos, beginning with the fact that they don't have enough pavement in any of the Florida bases to park more jets. As others have said, this company isn't ready to pull the trigger on overnights, that too would create chaos. This company decides by Occam's Razor: the simplest solution is the correct solution. They will furlough the first 100 no matter what. The second 100 remain to be seen. I wouldn't be surprised if they furlough all of the 2019 and 2020 hires though. I doubt they will dip into 2017.

I believe SAV, BNA, TYS, ABE, and VBD are on the chopping block. LAX and VPS may become seasonal.

Originally Posted by skydisaster (Post 3115919)

- it will then incur displacements costs on vast numbers of pilots. Think about a base like BLI or LAX. Most of those captains range from super senior to moderately senior. They will displace throughout the System.

- Many of the captains in the bases on your list upgraded out of the big bases, and many of those still commute. Most of them will bid displace back to FO in their big base. This will push existing FOs our to other bases.

- The small bases for more east coast flying than West. This will mean that while IWA and LAS would see small size increases, the bulk of the big base size increase would be in FL. This means more senior FOs being displaced to FL baes when the former captains downgrade back to their home base.

- Re-training requirements after recall are the same if the furlough lasts 1 day or 364 days, so a 1 month furlough to reset the bases won’t happen. It would be a year furlough.

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw (Post 3116623)

What section of the contract states that choice of domicile is included in displacement rights?

"You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw (Post 3116623)

What section of the contract states that choice of domicile is included in displacement rights?

"You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

Originally Posted by skydisaster (Post 3116627)

You are right it should be choose domicile system wide by seniority. 12 L 2 is what you are looking for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by skydisaster (Post 3116627)

You are right it should be choose domicile system wide by seniority. 12 L 2 is what you are looking for.

Originally Posted by captnate702 (Post 3116631)

6.E.2.a. is a good place to start...