The few against a ALV reduction are the pilots who can’t live within their means. They depend on a 90+hr/mo pay credit to just break even each month financially. So no, most of the group disagrees with your opinion of it being a hard sell and matter of fact, our 1000’s of sound off’s on that idea are the exact opposite of what your saying.

Amazing reference. May be embarrassing but really is one of my favorite sports movies/comedies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spot on, sir!!

There are plenty of pilots here well above the bottom 2500 that are not senior enough to hold a line in their respective bid status, and probably wont be able to for years to come now.

Most, if not all of those same pilots are very familiar with living within their means, because they had to do just that while they went through a furlough (or two) and over a decade of career stagnation at the bottom of the list. Many of those same people may only have a very limited time left to work, so they choose to fly more than minimum. They have also seen first hand what happens in bankruptcy, when you give concessions before they company goes to the courthouse.

I'm all for doing anything we can to keep everyone on property, and I'll be just fine if we take a reduction in monthly hours. I'm not naive enough however, to believe that anything we give will stop whats coming if this drags on much longer.

I'd like to add one more vote for

Fewer hours = possibly good idea if it stops furloughs

Lower pay rate/benefits/rigs = Hard no

# mee tooooo

#metoo
no way I vote for a reduction in pay rate/rigs/benefits/any work rules, even if it comes with a fancy guarantee. I will definitely entertain the idea of reduced hours IF tied to furlough reductions.

Yep. I’m happy to lower ALV to help prevent furloughs, but we need to be smart about it, with strong language to protect us from the company taking the cost savings and furloughing anyway.

Unfortunately, I highly doubt we’ll get a vote. APA will just tell us what they did after the fact.