Where is Charlie Bucket?
06-30-2020 | 09:36 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
This/\
Pilot furloughs are expensive, it's entirely possible they decide that pilot furloughs are worth it and it's better to be a little fat on pilots for a little while, particularly when looking at the retirements that are coming. And while I recognize that's the positive spin, it's still a realistic possibility. Nobody knows yet what the real answer is and I'm sure while the company is talking to the union about 'solutions' the company message is going to be that 'it's bad'.
Pilot furloughs are expensive, it's entirely possible they decide that pilot furloughs are worth it and it's better to be a little fat on pilots for a little while, particularly when looking at the retirements that are coming. And while I recognize that's the positive spin, it's still a realistic possibility. Nobody knows yet what the real answer is and I'm sure while the company is talking to the union about 'solutions' the company message is going to be that 'it's bad'.
if they would offer another LOA, I think more would take it now. I know I would. I have rotor jobs lined up that I didn’t have last time they offered.
The question I have as a junior FO is will they suspend the language to allow FOs to bid aircraft to aircraft. I hope not, bc I want to be displaced from the 145-175. If they do a vacancy and allow FOs to bid birds I’m stuck on the 145 for years, on reserve and not flying
06-30-2020 | 09:36 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,607
Likes: 12
I wholeheartedly agree with this take. Also want to add, cost saving measures will not save jobs. The company will furlough or not furlough based on demand. Cost saving measures really doesn't effect demand.
06-30-2020 | 09:37 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
From: CA
This/\
Pilot furloughs are expensive, it's entirely possible they decide that pilot furloughs are worth it and it's better to be a little fat on pilots for a little while, particularly when looking at the retirements that are coming. And while I recognize that's the positive spin, it's still a realistic possibility. Nobody knows yet what the real answer is and I'm sure while the company is talking to the union about 'solutions' the company message is going to be that 'it's bad'.
Pilot furloughs are expensive, it's entirely possible they decide that pilot furloughs are worth it and it's better to be a little fat on pilots for a little while, particularly when looking at the retirements that are coming. And while I recognize that's the positive spin, it's still a realistic possibility. Nobody knows yet what the real answer is and I'm sure while the company is talking to the union about 'solutions' the company message is going to be that 'it's bad'.
06-30-2020 | 09:41 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,607
Likes: 12
Doing it this early is Ric being decent and saying “hey get your crap ready for furloughs”.
if they would offer another LOA, I think more would take it now. I know I would. I have rotor jobs lined up that I didn’t have last time they offered.
The question I have as a junior FO is will they suspend the language to allow FOs to bid aircraft to aircraft. I hope not, bc I want to be displaced from the 145-175. If they do a vacancy and allow FOs to bid birds I’m stuck on the 145 for years, on reserve and not flying
if they would offer another LOA, I think more would take it now. I know I would. I have rotor jobs lined up that I didn’t have last time they offered.
The question I have as a junior FO is will they suspend the language to allow FOs to bid aircraft to aircraft. I hope not, bc I want to be displaced from the 145-175. If they do a vacancy and allow FOs to bid birds I’m stuck on the 145 for years, on reserve and not flying
I don't think it would matter if they 'relaxed' the language. The "proffer to displace" option I think would function as a vacancy unless there's something special in that provision regarding FOs or something (been a while since I read it). It's not the same thing but if you could have held it if there was a vacancy, you could probably hold it with proffer to displace if there's no vacancy.
06-30-2020 | 09:48 AM
#87
Banned
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
06-30-2020 | 09:50 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Eh, Rick isn't doing this to be decent.
I don't think it would matter if they 'relaxed' the language. The "proffer to displace" option I think would function as a vacancy unless there's something special in that provision regarding FOs or something (been a while since I read it). It's not the same thing but if you could have held it if there was a vacancy, you could probably hold it with proffer to displace if there's no vacancy.
I don't think it would matter if they 'relaxed' the language. The "proffer to displace" option I think would function as a vacancy unless there's something special in that provision regarding FOs or something (been a while since I read it). It's not the same thing but if you could have held it if there was a vacancy, you could probably hold it with proffer to displace if there's no vacancy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
