The whole point of the CARES Act. Not one union person was in that room when the agreement was negotiated with Congress.

Congress gets a win by saving jobs for 6 months, managment gets a win for being able to right size the company essentially for free (government picks up the tab) and furloughs one scale never before seen, (because never before has the government assisted in the furlough process) happened Oct 1.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

ALPA has lobbyists. Don't kid yourself that there was no union input.
These parts of the CARES act surely had unions pushing them: https://www.mackinac.org/union-provi...se-for-concern

 

ANNNNNK. Wrong. Lost all credibility right there. NEXT

 

The CARES Act is definitely a double edged sword.

On one hand, by picking up most of the labor costs it gives the company time to evaluate the recovery before making job cuts that are hard to undo. This benefits us because we keep our jobs AND the company may remain larger than if it had to react immediately with limited forecasts.

On the other hand, the company has time to prepare for an unprecedented furlough on 1 Oct.

On the whole its clearly better for us to as labor to have the CARES Act. I think we all know that without it they would've already furloughed a large number of us. This was a labor friendly piece of legislation that the company happens to be using for it's benefit (as I would expect them to).

 

The feds printing press is hammering away in the background ... for better or worse. Money is being thrown at the problem and big business could power right through this. If companies keep spending we have a chance. 30% is a lawn dart of a guess from two yards down.

 

In 32frvr's defense, almost all of us have made posts that aren't correct. I've had quite a few posts like this so I'm not criticizing him; my intent was to point out that there was a decent amount of union involvement with the CARES act.

Back to displacements - I think that at this point, the company is not too worried about displacing too many pilots. As has been pointed out, for many, it's just a quick RQ course on the way down. The same quick RQ course will apply on the way back up so I don't think the company is worried about the cost of downgrading too many pilots.

 

I hear that... but if it’s over 3 months it’s still a 2 week training event plus a shortened OE. Definitely quicker than a qual course, but it’s not a non-event, so to speak. Layer that on top of the fact that a displaced 777 FO may want to go to the 787, or after flying NB they might feel more comfortable taking the NB upgrade.

It’ll be much easier than a regular double-digit rapid growth (if there is such a thing), but hardly a slam dunk. For this reason, if the numbers continue to trend upwards, I think the senior end of the displacements may wait to train until late fall when the company had a better feel for travel demand, shelter-in-place and vaccine stuff. Unfortunately, I think the stakes surrounding an election year has both sides thinking more about their own objectives than the good of the economy/American public. I hope I’m wrong

 

It doesn’t look like anyone in the bottom 4000ish is going to be scheduled for training. Seems to jive with one of the furlough scenario numbers

might be worth asking PC about at the EWR town hall today

 

Not yet. Probably at least another 1-2 displacement bids before the dust settles. As it gets closer to October they will determine who will be trained who is junior. No way 4000 are furloughed.

 

Guys and gals,

From a TK/FTC source the training that has been scheduled so far only includes pilots needing the full QUAL course. There training blocks that are available for the shorter RQ-X courses that haven’t been made yet on the NB fleets. I also know of very senior WB Capts that got a schedule only to have it cancelled the next day.

Do not draw direct conclusions from who has been scheduled for whatever at this point. Just a recommendation.

Lee