Junior A post MD Guesses
#101
I don’t think that’s right. It takes into account mandatory retirements from now until next May. This bid is based on no one taking an early out, so anyone who does that is scheduled to retire after May 2021 would makes things better for potential furloughs.
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 0
From: Here and there
I agree with you unless the early outs is a new wrinkle added in.
#104
Where did he mention early outs? His AE memo built a buffer for expected retirements (mandatory + 10%.) Do you have access to another memo somewhere?
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 0
From: Here and there
I think he’s conflating early mandatory retirements with the results of any ERP they offer. It’s easy to see them as separate but upon further internal debate, I think they’re one in the same if that makes sense.
#106
Mathematically how are they the same? One is a known (approximately 660.) The other will be the result of an ERP -- which hasn't been announced yet.
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 0
From: Here and there
If they make the ERP specifically targeted towards those 660 plus another buffer, I can see his terminology as being dual purposed.
IDK, makes sense in my head!

#108
I don't think they'll be targeting people who will be retiring in the next 12 months. If they do, what's the point? Who knows?
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Wrong. Stop spewing inaccurate data
#110
Denny


