Yes voters. Honest question.
02-06-2021 | 02:49 PM
#81
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 853
Likes: 15
From: B6
I don’t know why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over this. It’s obviously not that important to the company or the grand plan if their best and final offer was a one time 2% cola. If it was really that important for Jetblue, the company would have made sure this passed with something we could not refuse (like free profit sharing language) and there was no chance of wasting such an opportunity for the future of Jetblue. So that tells me we send it back and if it’s that important to Jetblue’s future then they will come back and make sure it passes. If they don’t come back to the table then it wasn’t that important anyway and they were looking for a quick scope grab. You think the ELT and board would risk a once in a generation, future of jetblue deal and all they pony up was a one time 2% raise?
02-06-2021 | 02:54 PM
#82
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
That’s a massive assumption. Again, we are not provided the future booking info by the company for a reason. Why would you scream from the mountain tops about a May 2022 no furlough protection but then write in a series of relief valves you forget to mention in the sales job? If this is going to mean so much explosive growth and save us, why the relief valves? The company is fully committed and it’s the opportunity of the decade yet they want a way to break the deal with us but not AA? Makes you wonder.
02-06-2021 | 02:59 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Very simple: since the company and the union are saying no furloughs because of there “pilot count growth metrics,” then guarantee no furloughs for the life of the NEA. Easy. But they won’t do that now, will they. Ever wonder why?
02-06-2021 | 03:14 PM
#84
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,935
Likes: 0
From: Airbus Capt
I don’t know why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over this. It’s obviously not that important to the company or the grand plan if their best and final offer was a one time 2% cola. If it was really that important for Jetblue, the company would have made sure this passed with something we could not refuse (like free profit sharing language) and there was no chance of wasting such an opportunity for the future of Jetblue. So that tells me we send it back and if it’s that important to Jetblue’s future then they will come back and make sure it passes. If they don’t come back to the table then it wasn’t that important anyway and they were looking for a quick scope grab. You think the ELT and board would risk a once in a generation, future of jetblue deal and all they pony up was a one time 2% raise?
02-06-2021 | 03:16 PM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
Likes: 53
Yes voters. Honest question.
“It’s essentially a no furlough”
Goes right along with
“They would never do that”
“It doesn’t make sense for them to”
“They want to grow”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
02-06-2021 | 03:24 PM
#86
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
I think having to have a 1+ larger seniority list YOY is arguably better than a no furlough clause. (Assuming we survive the fall metrics) It requires them to grow the list to include replacing attrition/retirements. And you lock in job protection for new hires going forward as opposed to just guaranteeing pilots currently on property no furlough.
02-06-2021 | 03:25 PM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
but wait. I thought the company didn’t want to furlough? I thought it was just a scare tactic to get this thing signed? But the vaccine? And everyone has a friend who wants to travel.
02-06-2021 | 03:28 PM
#88
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
I don’t know why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over this. It’s obviously not that important to the company or the grand plan if their best and final offer was a one time 2% cola. If it was really that important for Jetblue, the company would have made sure this passed with something we could not refuse (like free profit sharing language) and there was no chance of wasting such an opportunity for the future of Jetblue. So that tells me we send it back and if it’s that important to Jetblue’s future then they will come back and make sure it passes. If they don’t come back to the table then it wasn’t that important anyway and they were looking for a quick scope grab. You think the ELT and board would risk a once in a generation, future of jetblue deal and all they pony up was a one time 2% raise?
02-06-2021 | 03:36 PM
#89
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 476
Likes: 1
I think having to have a 1+ larger seniority list YOY is arguably better than a no furlough clause. (Assuming we survive the fall metrics) It requires them to grow the list to include replacing attrition/retirements. And you lock in job protection for new hires going forward as opposed to just guaranteeing pilots currently on property no furlough.
02-06-2021 | 03:37 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,088
Likes: 12
This place ain’t furloughing if they have to wait until the late fall timeframe to do it either because of LOA 13 or because government support runs out.
That’s almost two years since the pandemic started and with a vaccine that’s been widely distributed to the public for months now, with the holiday season around the corner. That’s also almost two years of PTO accrual (if you didn’t blow through it) and longevity to go towards furlough pay.
That’s almost two years since the pandemic started and with a vaccine that’s been widely distributed to the public for months now, with the holiday season around the corner. That’s also almost two years of PTO accrual (if you didn’t blow through it) and longevity to go towards furlough pay.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
