FDX: HKG rumors?
#31
I think it is kind of slimey to tell a guy who was 59 & 364 that it is somehow okay for him to bid a window seat while at the same time telling the guy who is exactly 60 that it's too bad. And telling that 60 yr old the same thing for the next 3 years while he watches a 61-63 yr old bid Capt while he's locked into a SO seat just because he was born a day late.
But that's just me
But that's just me
#32
Maybe it would be better if it were similar to what Southwest is doing. They are letting the "prunes" come back, they keep their longevity, ie vacation, but they start over at the bottom seniority wise. If they want to fly until they die, they get to start from the bottom again.
I think that would be a heck of a lot less heartburn than a guy who has an "injury" goes on disability and comes back to the window seat like nothing happened.
My gleeming hope is that when these guys can start taking their social security at 62 they actually start to retire....
I think that would be a heck of a lot less heartburn than a guy who has an "injury" goes on disability and comes back to the window seat like nothing happened.
My gleeming hope is that when these guys can start taking their social security at 62 they actually start to retire....
#33
Aeris,
the very simple difference is that the Age 60 guy at a pax carrier had to retire w/ no choice of continued employment.....versus our guys who could retire or move to the back seat.
So, in one situation you have a guy who has retired and left the seniority list.....and in the other, you have a guy who never retired and is still on the seniority list.
And Haywood, while I don't have any intel on what SWA is doing, it sounds as if they are "rehiring" their recent retirees as newhires and allowing them to retain their longevity (which the law did not require them to do)
And, I'm sure it feels incredibly unfair to the pax carrier guys who had to retire, but govt is unfair. The govt is the only entity allowed to legally discriminate (Congress is notorious for exempting themselves from various laws they pass).
I think our right bid via the seniority should be sacrosanct, and, it's obvious that some people think these guys seniority rights should have gone away at 60.
the very simple difference is that the Age 60 guy at a pax carrier had to retire w/ no choice of continued employment.....versus our guys who could retire or move to the back seat.
So, in one situation you have a guy who has retired and left the seniority list.....and in the other, you have a guy who never retired and is still on the seniority list.
And Haywood, while I don't have any intel on what SWA is doing, it sounds as if they are "rehiring" their recent retirees as newhires and allowing them to retain their longevity (which the law did not require them to do)
And, I'm sure it feels incredibly unfair to the pax carrier guys who had to retire, but govt is unfair. The govt is the only entity allowed to legally discriminate (Congress is notorious for exempting themselves from various laws they pass).
I think our right bid via the seniority should be sacrosanct, and, it's obvious that some people think these guys seniority rights should have gone away at 60.
#34
Maybe it would be better if it were similar to what Southwest is doing. They are letting the "prunes" come back, they keep their longevity, ie vacation, but they start over at the bottom seniority wise. If they want to fly until they die, they get to start from the bottom again.
I think that would be a heck of a lot less heartburn than a guy who has an "injury" goes on disability and comes back to the window seat like nothing happened.
My gleeming hope is that when these guys can start taking their social security at 62 they actually start to retire....
I think that would be a heck of a lot less heartburn than a guy who has an "injury" goes on disability and comes back to the window seat like nothing happened.
My gleeming hope is that when these guys can start taking their social security at 62 they actually start to retire....
BWP...Geiko customer
#35
Gone away? Nope, they should have maintained the same seniority rights they had when they turned 60. Job security, 36 days of vacation, a bazillon sick hours, relative seniority within their seat position , 2% per year if they hadn't reached 25 yrs service, multiplier on their pension when they retire, the ability to call you "son" when you disagree with him, everything. Oh yeah, and Thanksgiving dinner with DW! Not sure who pays for the Dom?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



