What it would take to be a yes to LOA13
02-04-2021, 07:34 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 918
Originally Posted by AYLflyer
I've read your other responses and just want to say we're all in this crap together, regardless of attitudes on this and other boards. I love working here, I want JB to do well and beat the other guys. I'm a fairly junior guy and my attitude to this LOA is, for all I care, send me a WARN letter. I'd rather get furloughed than give up an inch of our scope. Scope is never for sale.
I'm also trying to look at this logically from the company point of view. If this was occurring a year ago when this first started, the odds of job loss were very, VERY high. We're only here because of government intervention/bailouts. At this point though we have a vaccine that's being distributed nationwide. Airlines are talking recovery strategies, such as increasing flyin. My buddies at other airlines are talking about hiring and places like Frontier and Allegiant are going to be running classes soon. This past recurrent here at the school house, our management was talking about wanting to hire in Q2/Q3, we're expanding our flying to new markets, and they are gung ho about going to London in 2021. We just released a new Mint experience and are marketing our ability to compete with the big guys on overseas routes. So after all of that, NOW we're going to furlough?
I wrote this in another thread but here's the furlough timeline.
60 day notice if they do it immediately. So that would put us early Spring. By late Spring the vaccines should be hitting the general public. Everyone else is ramping up flying, and we....furlough? Okay well a furlough costs the company money, and is a multi-year deal. Displacements, training etc etc, and they're going to do that right in the middle of their launch to Europe? They're going to water cannon salute a new airplane on new routes (A220) while they have pilots on the streets? I was having this discussion with a friend of mine at a legacy airline, and we both agreed that furloughing at this point, 1+ year into the pandemic would be shooting themselves in the foot based on their aggressive recovery strategy.
Also, this was originally marketed as a COVID recovery strat, but suddenly it's an up to 12yr deal. No thanks.
I'm also trying to look at this logically from the company point of view. If this was occurring a year ago when this first started, the odds of job loss were very, VERY high. We're only here because of government intervention/bailouts. At this point though we have a vaccine that's being distributed nationwide. Airlines are talking recovery strategies, such as increasing flyin. My buddies at other airlines are talking about hiring and places like Frontier and Allegiant are going to be running classes soon. This past recurrent here at the school house, our management was talking about wanting to hire in Q2/Q3, we're expanding our flying to new markets, and they are gung ho about going to London in 2021. We just released a new Mint experience and are marketing our ability to compete with the big guys on overseas routes. So after all of that, NOW we're going to furlough?
I wrote this in another thread but here's the furlough timeline.
60 day notice if they do it immediately. So that would put us early Spring. By late Spring the vaccines should be hitting the general public. Everyone else is ramping up flying, and we....furlough? Okay well a furlough costs the company money, and is a multi-year deal. Displacements, training etc etc, and they're going to do that right in the middle of their launch to Europe? They're going to water cannon salute a new airplane on new routes (A220) while they have pilots on the streets? I was having this discussion with a friend of mine at a legacy airline, and we both agreed that furloughing at this point, 1+ year into the pandemic would be shooting themselves in the foot based on their aggressive recovery strategy.
Also, this was originally marketed as a COVID recovery strat, but suddenly it's an up to 12yr deal. No thanks.
Next, the legacies are so big it's really hard to get much bigger so they have to try to just fend off the little guys or shrink. LCCs/ULCCs has a lottt of growth left to do, this is why Spirit, Frontier etc are firing up the engines to get ready to grab market share. And our plan is furlough? Smh our little LOA failure is gonna send JB into a cash bleeding machine? Come on now. Folks saying "I looked at the big picture", did you look at the biggest picture? Cash bleeding now doesn't mean cash bleeding in August (might be a cash drip drip if that lol)
02-04-2021, 07:41 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,512
We are way past the point of furloughing.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
02-04-2021, 07:46 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: fifi whisperer
Posts: 1,255
Originally Posted by Boomer
We are way past the point of furloughing.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
Voting for this LOA because you are worried about a furlough is like voting yes or no on this LOA because you are upset or happy about the FLiCA waiting room.
Edit- didn't write it in my original answer, but implied it-- I'm not worried about us furloughing. I view this LOA as a vote opportunity versus a vote of fear.
02-04-2021, 07:58 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by Boomer
We are way past the point of furloughing.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
It’s never been a short-term solution. They need to look at least a year out and take their best guess if a furlough is worth the expense.
Today, they can look back to Summer 2020 and say “we probably could have furloughed” but looking forward a year from now? None of the trends point to it.
02-04-2021, 08:15 AM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 983
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
Count me as a friend as well...
Back to the LOA.
This LOA needs a poison pill. If a merger with AA is announced, "the pilots of JB ALPA rescind all codesharing relief on any aircraft with less than 100 seats".
This partnership come be part of a prepackaged or pre-planned merger, or could become a merger at any point within or after an AA bankruptcy.
Going into joint CBA/SLI negotiations as JB pilots after giving up this scope would be very harmful.
Back to the LOA.
This LOA needs a poison pill. If a merger with AA is announced, "the pilots of JB ALPA rescind all codesharing relief on any aircraft with less than 100 seats".
This partnership come be part of a prepackaged or pre-planned merger, or could become a merger at any point within or after an AA bankruptcy.
Going into joint CBA/SLI negotiations as JB pilots after giving up this scope would be very harmful.
02-04-2021, 08:22 AM
#86
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2014
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by seekingblue
Don't vote for LOA16 because you are worried about a furlough. Vote for LOA 16 because you want growth, hiring, upgrades, more airplanes (or more out of the desert,) and generally good stuff for Jetblue ALPA pilots.
Voting for this LOA because you are worried about a furlough is like voting yes or no on this LOA because you are upset or happy about the FLiCA waiting room.
Edit- didn't write it in my original answer, but implied it-- I'm not worried about us furloughing. I view this LOA as a vote opportunity versus a vote of fear.
Voting for this LOA because you are worried about a furlough is like voting yes or no on this LOA because you are upset or happy about the FLiCA waiting room.
Edit- didn't write it in my original answer, but implied it-- I'm not worried about us furloughing. I view this LOA as a vote opportunity versus a vote of fear.
02-04-2021, 08:26 AM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 776
I voted No.
I see the benefit of the agreement and I understand why the MEC brought it to us. I hold ZERO ill will toward a single representative, they are absolutely doing their best.
However - in my professional opinion - the benefit does not meet the risk. The risk is too great for 2%. I'm not the greedy type, but my concerns aren't about short term gains here, we are talking about the potential of long term losses in our case. We have learned from previous generations that airlines will and do take full advantage of scope in pilot labor agreements. Just because the current management team might have the best intentions, doesn't mean the next crop won't exploit every nook and cranny of this scope give. Think about that. You don't bulldoze your house to stay in a Four Seasons for a week.
It is simply not acceptable in its current form. The language has got to be tighter and we need more accountability from the Company if they want us to take this large of a risk. Just an opinion of a junior FO.
I see the benefit of the agreement and I understand why the MEC brought it to us. I hold ZERO ill will toward a single representative, they are absolutely doing their best.
However - in my professional opinion - the benefit does not meet the risk. The risk is too great for 2%. I'm not the greedy type, but my concerns aren't about short term gains here, we are talking about the potential of long term losses in our case. We have learned from previous generations that airlines will and do take full advantage of scope in pilot labor agreements. Just because the current management team might have the best intentions, doesn't mean the next crop won't exploit every nook and cranny of this scope give. Think about that. You don't bulldoze your house to stay in a Four Seasons for a week.
It is simply not acceptable in its current form. The language has got to be tighter and we need more accountability from the Company if they want us to take this large of a risk. Just an opinion of a junior FO.
02-04-2021, 08:37 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Posts: 453
Originally Posted by SmitteyB
I voted No.
I see the benefit of the agreement and I understand why the MEC brought it to us. I hold ZERO ill will toward a single representative, they are absolutely doing their best.
I see the benefit of the agreement and I understand why the MEC brought it to us. I hold ZERO ill will toward a single representative, they are absolutely doing their best.
The issue that some forget is LOA 12. As has been discussed here, that basically allows the majority of this AA deal, regardless of the outcome of this TA vote. It still kind of bothers me that there was no membership vote on that LOA, even though I’m pretty sure it would’ve passed. I know, I know, NDA and time critical and all.
02-04-2021, 08:39 AM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: fifi whisperer
Posts: 1,255
Originally Posted by Wounded Duck
Looks like you finally came around. I'm not sure it will take until LOA 16 to get a reasonable deal but definitely not LOA 13 and probably not LOA 14. I think LOA 15 could get us growth, hiring, upgrades, more airplanes and generally good stuff as you say. Basically the opposite of what LOA 13 is offering. Waiting for LOA 16 is a little pessimistic.
To be clear, I'm 100% yes.
I think this gives us great opportunities as Jetblue Pilots. But i'm not advocating voting for this LOA solely because you are worried about furloughs.
