Originally Posted by HalyardJammer (Post 3144525)

It clearly bothers the company more because they've been trying to take that letter over and over. To suddenly stop would thrill the company because that's what they wanted all along. And according to Tom, the cost savings from the letter far exceeds the cost of the pilots furloughed, or am I misremembering?

Originally Posted by SilentLurker (Post 3144530)

Why not keep the letter and follow ethics and integrity while pilots are on furlough.

Just because we can do something does not always mean we should (during this time of brothers and sisters on the street.

Originally Posted by ClappedOut145 (Post 3144492)

Another thing to consider is how many of the furloughed pilots were actually line qualified? From the looks of the list a significant number were in the training pipeline and of no real use right now.

Originally Posted by rld1k (Post 3144532)

I believe the number was the letter costs them over 500% what the furloughs cost savings was. Why not worry about your own airline, many have taken concessions during this unlike envoy.

Originally Posted by SilentLurker (Post 3144547)

Fictional & Delusional. Smh.

Originally Posted by SilentLurker (Post 3144530)

Why not keep the letter and follow ethics, integrity, and history while pilots are on furlough.

Just because we can do something does not always mean we should (during this time with brothers and sisters on the street.

Originally Posted by SilentLurker (Post 3144547)

Fictional & Delusional. Smh.

Originally Posted by Lucifer (Post 3144485)

The entire employee cost is looked at, not simply the wage per hour. They look at everything from the on-boarding costs which includes the recruiting staff, the interview hotels, medical tests, transportation; then new hire on-boarding, ground school, hotels, transportation, simulator time, the instructors time, the administrative staff time; then paying the company share of all benefits, providing paid vacation time, and paid sick time.

It is much cheaper to pay an OT premium, even at 100% than to hire an extra employee that costs all the extra training, benefits and vacations. That holds true right up until the point that it becomes cheaper to pay all the misc costs to get the lower hourly rate. When that happens is something only they know.

You can't advocate NOT picking up OT, but you certainly shouldn't be encouraging it. The flip side is, if your pilots are already doing the right thing and the company has quietly threatened the union for a job action due to a large drop in OT pickup, then making that post would be a smart move.

This is for any airline, not just yours.

Originally Posted by aewhistleblower (Post 3144557)

You ain’t that silent, huh!?

If we had a properly staffed airline we wouldn’t be JM and zeroing out RSV pilots all the time. In respect to OT, our pilots are just exercising their contract. We all have our own personal reasons to pick up OT, and it should be respected.