Company wants a 15% reduction in ALV for 1 year of no furloughs. Let the infighting begin.

So when we shoot it down management can in good faith say "See, we offered it to them, a way out of furloughs, but they didn't agree". All part of their master plan. Can't have the FAs organizing.

If they are saying 1 yr furloughs protection vs 2 yrs (previous letter), for me, it means that the VEOP might save enough UNA pilots for next year.

It seems they want to lower the WB ALV while keeping the narrow bodies working harder.

By my math that’s ~61 hours. I say we follow jebtlue’s example and only consider an ALV reduction as long as it does not lower line gaurentee (65). if we reduce RES gaurentee (not lower than 65) it should come with 2 more days off.

edit: how will unwinding the MOAD work for 9 closing categories? Will they keep the closed ER and 717? Will they not close CVG?

ALV reduction without a min guarantee reduction seems like a win/win. What am I missing?

Definitely interesting that now they want to flex ALV by category, not uniformly across the whole pilot group.

It certainly adjusts for the actual flying being done. After all, when -is- most international flying going to return anyways?

“It also assigns a category to pilots who were previously assigned UNA.”

Would this be your previous category or a new bid with a seat lock?

Overall I think this is not a bad deal. The world is shutting back down and a secure job for a year is huge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know JL has said in one of his town hall video's that he has been told that he can NOT negotiate in public. Apparently he doesn't understand what that means.

Well net need the domestic flying strong. WB flying is done for a year. They don’t want to train those guys to Nb to retrain them in a year back to WB. They also want the flexibility to increase the international flying when it comes back (if it comes back), while paying them 60hrs to stay home doing nothing.

I think is fair, but whatever...it needs to come down to Memrat and see if it passes. But we need to adress scope first.