|
|
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 1715151)
Is there anything in the PWA that prevents targeted early-retirement programs?
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1715113)
So you're saying that they are offering it to select pilots on select 4 engine airplanes? Hell no. Sorry. That's wrong. Displace 'em, and train 'em.
Then again maybe we are pushing for reduced lease rates and this is all three dimensional-time warp-ninja management Chess. :D Scoop |
Agree with Tsquare and GG. Early outs are something the company needs to avoid a very expensive and manpower-draining training cascade. (of course the company's bean counters didn't look at those limfacs when making their decision). So now they're up a creek.
They need to provide incentive if they want to offer them (in seniority order, of course). However...I see DALPA (and us) getting rolled. Again. |
Super Premium Retirement...;)
|
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1715182)
Agree with Tsquare and GG. Early outs are something the company needs to avoid a very expensive and manpower-draining training cascade. (of course the company's bean counters didn't look at those limfacs when making their decision). So now they're up a creek.
They need to provide incentive if they want to offer them (in seniority order, of course). However...I see DALPA (and us) getting rolled. Again. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1715189)
I don't think we are gonna get rolled here. I just don't think we are gonna get anything substantial out of it other than not having displacements that imho will be short term anyway.
As long as they offer it to.everyone in seniority order. If not, then we can pass on this deal. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1715113)
So you're saying that they are offering it to select pilots on select 4 engine airplanes? Hell no. Sorry. That's wrong. Displace 'em, and train 'em.
Never thought i'd see the day. Jerry |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1715193)
As long as they offer it to.everyone in seniority order.
If not, then we can pass on this deal. I am not getting some of the angst with this whole (possible) deal. It almost seems like some would rather have them displace these pilots (causing more possible displacements) than to try and mitigate the damage? Which course of action provides the best possible outcome for the pilot group and why? (Not a rhetorical question and assuming we aren't giving anything up) |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1715144)
(or even 737 driver, damn that thing is senior for no obvious reason).
The 737 is senior for a number of reasons. Not everyone wants to fly long-haul international. The 737 has the best trips in the system. It's all about quality of life. That is why it's senior. I'm middle of the pack on the 737. I can hold international on larger aircraft in my base. I choose not to because of the lifestyle the 737 affords. Guys senior to me aren't going anywhere, either. It's all about lifestyle. |
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1715198)
Exactly. As long as it is in senioirty order, what is the big deal?
I am not getting some of the angst with this whole (possible) deal. It almost seems like some would rather have them displace these pilots (causing more possible displacements) than to try and mitigate the damage? Which course of action provides the best possible outcome for the pilot group and why? (Not a rhetorical question and assuming we aren't giving anything up) Any time we ask the company for something, they expect something in return. Now, what are they going to give in return for something they badly need? We've got to get every penny and every second off when we can...the company will take every penny and second off when it can. Or is "constructive engagement" a one-way (or should I say "wrong way") street for the pilot group? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:43 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands