System Bid
06-24-2019, 08:17 AM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Posts: 591
Originally Posted by hyperboy
You act like it got voted in by 50% plus one. The majority wanted this contract for (enter their reasons). Now the minority yells from the pulpit.
That that mean they okay with this too!
Probably not.
06-24-2019, 08:29 AM
#102
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by hyperboy
74% that voted yes for the CBA.
Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?
Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?
I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.
There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.
06-24-2019, 10:53 AM
#103
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: fifi whisperer
Posts: 1,255
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
What does that mean to you?
Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?
Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?
I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.
There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.
Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?
Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?
I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.
There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.
06-24-2019, 11:22 AM
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: B6
Posts: 1,047
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
What does that mean to you?
Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?
Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?
I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.
There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.
Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?
Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?
I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.
There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.
06-24-2019, 11:25 AM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: B6
Posts: 1,047
Originally Posted by BlueJetDork
3 of 4 voted for no profit sharing.
That that mean they okay with this too!
Probably not.
That that mean they okay with this too!
Probably not.
Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....
06-24-2019, 11:43 AM
#106
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 442
Originally Posted by hyperboy
Each pilot has reason or a combination of reasons they voted YES or NO. Profit Sharing may or may not have been one of them.
Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....
Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....
Do I really need to point out to you that when times are bad, ie when there’s no profit, profit sharing costs the company nothing? If companies aren’t making profit, and therefore aren’t giving out profit sharing, how can you possibly imply that profit sharing leads to furloughs?
Correlation does not equal causation.
Also, delta started in what, 1924? They had proudly never furloughed. Until they did. In what was it, 91 or so?
To imply jetblue is somehow superior, immune from, or less prone to furlough (and link it to industry lagging PS) is simply ignoring the cyclical nature of this industry, and ignoring where jetblue falls on the growth/maturation scale of any company, much less an airline, as well as the fact that businesses change, the economy changes, as do a whole other multitude of factors that affect furloughs. Profit sharing isn’t really one of those factors. So, to link them is ignorant at best.
Last edited by jamesholzhauer; 06-24-2019 at 12:00 PM.
06-24-2019, 03:32 PM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 357
Originally Posted by BlueJetDork
Profits cause furloughs.
That is a new one.
That is a new one.
It’s so sad that some people here take any criticism (constructive or otherwise) of JB or the CBA as a personal attack. I suppose we should just be happy with whatever we get and if we want to make it better we should LEAVE!
06-24-2019, 03:55 PM
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Posts: 3,150
Originally Posted by jamesholzhauer
Whoa wait a sec. It appears you are implying companies that have large profit sharing programs are more prone to furlough? Is that correct?
Do I really need to point out to you that when times are bad, ie when there’s no profit, profit sharing costs the company nothing? If companies aren’t making profit, and therefore aren’t giving out profit sharing, how can you possibly imply that profit sharing leads to furloughs?
Correlation does not equal causation.
Also, delta started in what, 1924? They had proudly never furloughed. Until they did. In what was it, 91 or so?
To imply jetblue is somehow superior, immune from, or less prone to furlough (and link it to industry lagging PS) is simply ignoring the cyclical nature of this industry, and ignoring where jetblue falls on the growth/maturation scale of any company, much less an airline, as well as the fact that businesses change, the economy changes, as do a whole other multitude of factors that affect furloughs. Profit sharing isn’t really one of those factors. So, to link them is ignorant at best.
Do I really need to point out to you that when times are bad, ie when there’s no profit, profit sharing costs the company nothing? If companies aren’t making profit, and therefore aren’t giving out profit sharing, how can you possibly imply that profit sharing leads to furloughs?
Correlation does not equal causation.
Also, delta started in what, 1924? They had proudly never furloughed. Until they did. In what was it, 91 or so?
To imply jetblue is somehow superior, immune from, or less prone to furlough (and link it to industry lagging PS) is simply ignoring the cyclical nature of this industry, and ignoring where jetblue falls on the growth/maturation scale of any company, much less an airline, as well as the fact that businesses change, the economy changes, as do a whole other multitude of factors that affect furloughs. Profit sharing isn’t really one of those factors. So, to link them is ignorant at best.
Not at all.
And i think you know that’s not what he’s saying.
Delta. The “gold standard” of PS has a profit sharing model that was negotiated in BK. During a time of many furloughs. They were able to maintain that PS in the last round of negotiations due to a no vote and renegotiation.
Times are different. Companies are different. We could have voted no until we got every single thing we wanted. Every one. We’d never leave negotiations.
Last edited by CaptCoolHand; 06-24-2019 at 04:11 PM.
06-24-2019, 04:23 PM
#110
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 442
Originally Posted by CaptCoolHand
Profits do not cause furloughs...
Not at all.
And i think you know that’s not what he’s saying.
Delta. The “gold standard” of PS has a profit sharing model that was negotiated in BK. During a time of many furloughs. They were able to maintain that PS in the last round of negotiations due to a no vote and renegotiation.
Times are different. Companies are different. We could have voted no until we got every single thing we wanted. Every one. We’d never leave negotiations.
Not at all.
And i think you know that’s not what he’s saying.
Delta. The “gold standard” of PS has a profit sharing model that was negotiated in BK. During a time of many furloughs. They were able to maintain that PS in the last round of negotiations due to a no vote and renegotiation.
Times are different. Companies are different. We could have voted no until we got every single thing we wanted. Every one. We’d never leave negotiations.
Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....
AA/US furloughed a lot: bad PS.
SWA hasn’t furloughed: decent PS
JB hasn’t furloughed: used to have good PS
PS has zero to do with furloughs. And HB said they do. I called him out.
I see you changed your post, but you are still somewhat conflating my statement that PS/furloughs aren’t related with a yes/no/74%/negotiations argument. My stance on my post you replied to is purely debunking a PS-furlough correlation/causation argument that HB made. And if you don’t see he clearly said that...well...sorry for ya, but a back and forth about something unrelated won’t be productive. If you want to start a separate thread on yes vs no or 74% or how we got shafted with our PS and how DL got theirs, then fine. But this has already gotten off topic, I just wanted to set the record straight for ol hyper that us getting PS is in no way related to us getting furloughed, as he implied in his post.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
