Originally Posted by threeighteen (Post 3661575)

hah. Yeah. I wish I could revise that post. We aren’t going to furlough if this doesn’t pass. We might if it does, but I doubt that too, we’d probably just keep shrinking as the ACMIs show up to take our flying. But either way, I’d rather be furloughed under the current CBA than under the TA.

Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox (Post 3661521)

This is absolute fearmongering and trying to get pilots hired since COVID to vote for this TA! Unconscionable! This TA is killing the A-plan and replacing it with a cash balance plan that fails to match Delta's contribution.

This TA is NOT in the best interest of new hires. 600-800 old pilots ARE NOT going to retire if this TA passes. FedEx will not let that happen.

Originally Posted by Laughing_Jakal (Post 3661584)

actually if you’re furloughed under the TA, the penalty payment goes to you not the association……look it up. Under current CBA….penalty goes to Union to decide what to do with it.

Originally Posted by threeighteen (Post 3661611)

Yeah I'm aware of that, thank you.

Still would rather be furloughed under current CBA where I know I'll spend shorter time on furlough because of a higher wet-lease penalty that will make wet leasing less practical.

To me that would beat getting some laughable amount of $$ on a wet-lease check while I watch ATLAS/Sun Country/MESA/ATI/Hawaiian/Western Global/Amerijet fly our freight. Besides, that wetlease check will probably just reduce my unemployment check... so its really not giving me any extra money that I wouldn't have had anyway.



This is not true at all. The TA penalty will be significantly less than the current CBA penalty due to them using block hours instead of credit hours, and they will be able to wetlease a lot more lift for a lot less money. They'll gain a bunch of free wetleasing before they even trigger the scope penalty payments, and then after that they'll get reduced scope penalty payments until they trigger the full 2x SPR payment, which will still be discount for them over current book due to the new formula.

Originally Posted by Laughing_Jakal (Post 3661621)

keep reading…additional furlough payment of 1 whole SPR IN ADDTION TO THE PENALTY…not to exceed 2.5 X…..So first 1% = 0 penalty +SPR = 1 SPR to furloughed crew members….that’s my read…..

Originally Posted by oncewasgood (Post 3661634)

Significant discount? How much? A couple million only if the fleet INCREASES in size. How is the fleet going to be INCREASING in size if we are furloughing? You honestly think a couple million dollars will prevent wet leases if the company needs them? The new language adds hard limits that DIDN’T exist before. You are just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by oncewasgood (Post 3661650)

NO NO NO. Read my previous post regarding how they came up with “credit” under our current CBA language. Do a DART and the Scope Committee Chair will tell you that you are wrong like I have numerous times. The block vs credit is negligible and simplifies the calculation and captures credit previously not captured.

From TA website - Penalties are anticipated to be less than the current structure; however, wet leasing hours not currently captured would be included in the new calculation and the new SPR definition will result in higher payment for each credit hour in some instances.

The only reason penalties are less using the most recent Atlas wet lease as an example is because the fleet size INCREASED. Under a decreasing fleet scenario this same dynamic is not true. Especially if furloughs occurred then 2.5 kicks into place.


Im done spoon feeding you the real information. Do some homework.

Originally Posted by Stan446 (Post 3661416)

Absolutely untrue. BLGs are up across most fleets for August except for the MD, as expected, and A300. 777 is at 90 some hrs, most fleets requiring buy up are within a few hours of BLG. Hopefully the loads are heading up.