Airline Pilot Central Forums - Rip off the bandaid now or slowly bleed out?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - Rip off the bandaid now or slowly bleed out? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/128661-rip-off-bandaid-now-slowly-bleed-out.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 3017187)

OK, I didn't look hard enough. If that's what it is then everybody should take the grant unless they have some weird circumstance.

My understanding of it as it’s been explained to us at F9 is Grant $ = X Payroll $ = Y. If X<Y the difference has to be made up somewhere. Since it specifically says furloughs are off the table until Oct 1, that isn’t an option. It’s the reason a COLA LOA is in the works for us now (after the stimulus was announced). If not enough people take a COLA to make up for the shortage in payroll, that may be why taking the grant $ may not be an option for some companies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 3017065)

no this is a real concern. If your employer doesn't need cash now, they might take a longer-term view.

8-777-cash-now!

Quote:

Originally Posted by JulesWinfield (Post 3017057)

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...rim-workforce/

not to be a dick but that is from the FA union and they have a less than stellar reputation for being a reliable source for information on the company. FWIW the pilot union also has issues with the ETO program as it circumvents the RLA and our CBA. I think both unions just want to have a say in working together to come up with a partial leave package.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickGassko (Post 3017234)

Yes, that's the math they're dealing with.

In some case it might be acceptable if X < Y by some modest amount...

1. Furloughs cost money for training, relocation, etc. If you have lots of fleet types, furloughs cost big money.

2. If they see a potential opportunity to be ready to grab market share later in the year if things rebound, they might be willing to blow a little cash in order to be fully staffed and ready. Big three probably equate massive shrinkage to survival, others may see an opportunity to play chess.

But it sounds like the grants will pretty much cover payroll costs + bennies anyway, unless somebody significantly grew their labor force since the same time period last year. Even then, probably better to take the grant.

Please read the bill before making assumptions on the future... so much misinformation by forum trolls who haven’t spent 10 minutes to read the airline section of the bill.

So if SWA doesn’t take the money, do the rest of us get a bigger piece of the pie?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 305808 (Post 3017595)

So if SWA doesn’t take the money, do the rest of us get a bigger piece of the pie?

No. Each airline was only allocated what it would cost them to cover payroll and benefits through September 30th.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo22 (Post 3017199)

At least the lack of open time and premiums as well as overtime in other positions will be way lower or nonexistent this year and reduced lines will stretch it a bit further for pretty much all carriers. Even with growth I think payroll costs could be lower.

good point

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoover (Post 3017280)

That's fine, but there's discussion of exactly what I am talking about in the Southwest forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ugleeual (Post 3017552)

Please read the bill before making assumptions on the future... so much misinformation by forum trolls who haven’t spent 10 minutes to read the airline section of the bill.

The details in the bill don't tell you who is going to take the bait. It might help you guess though.

Treasury has a say on the details too...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKBN21I09X