Search
Notices

Update

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-25-2020, 01:49 PM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Airbus CA
Posts: 910
Default

Originally Posted by captnate702 View Post
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.
A big fat agree here as well. The logistics on this would be overwhelming....crew rest, hotels, transportation, aircraft maintenance requirements, outstation staffing, catering, weather delays, mechanicals, the impact of large-scale weather events - it goes on and on. Allegiant experience in dealing with these issues has been limited to the occasional charter or irregular ops. event. This would be 100's of times more to deal with, every day. Management expertise as well as IT infrastructure would have to be brought on board and the changeover from out-and-backs to a more traditional 2-3-4 day trip structure would have to be gradual and piecemeal. This isn't something you can flip the switch on overnight.
tailendcharlie is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 06:28 AM
  #42  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by skydisaster View Post
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
Can you point me to where in the contract it says they have to honor domicile choices in a bump/flush displacement?
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 06:41 AM
  #43  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by Jim Rockford View Post
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?
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.
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 06:47 AM
  #44  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by skydisaster View Post
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
What section of the contract requires the company to honor domicile choices in a bump/flush displacement due to base closures? I think some people may be in for an unpleasant surprise if they didn't read carefully. The 80 displacement was handled quite generously, because the company wanted help from the pilots for a rapid transition. Don't expect such indulgences this time.
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 07:02 AM
  #45  
Gets Tue/Wed and Sat Off
 
Vegaspilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 551
Default

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw View Post
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.

All good points. I tend to agree with just about everything there. I’ve been thinking the base structure is going to change since this whole mess started. At this point I just want to know what’s happening.
Vegaspilot is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 08:54 AM
  #46  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by skydisaster View Post

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

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 08:59 AM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
skydisaster's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: First Officer
Posts: 432
Default

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw View Post
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."

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
skydisaster is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 09:01 AM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 648
Default

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw View Post
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."
6.E.2.a. is a good place to start...
captnate702 is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 09:01 AM
  #49  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by skydisaster View Post
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
It states "Position", which is a defined term in the definitions section.
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Old 08-26-2020, 09:07 AM
  #50  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 669
Default

Originally Posted by skydisaster View Post
You are right it should be choose domicile system wide by seniority. 12 L 2 is what you are looking for.
"Position" and "Displace/Displacement" are a defined terms in Section 2. Category and Class. A320 Captain.

Originally Posted by captnate702 View Post
6.E.2.a. is a good place to start...
That is for moving expenses, which are irrespective of displacement rights. Yes, you get moving expenses if you are displaced out of your domicile. This doesn't state where you must go if you're displaced.
Nick Bradshaw is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EWRflyr
United
9
01-28-2012 11:34 AM
jetguy
Hangar Talk
3
09-23-2010 10:56 AM
CA Jimenez
United
8
09-06-2010 05:42 AM
Voski
Pilot Health
2
12-08-2009 02:24 PM
chrtrplt
Cargo
16
09-24-2006 12:17 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices