Search

Notices

Voting is open

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:24 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Mudge
Yes. But most of us saw this coming in March. My guess is 5 years off property. I don't want to come back to less than what I'll be leaving with.
Smart move Mudge!!
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:32 AM
  #22  
Banned
 
Joined: Sep 2020
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Big5
Depends, we have different menus depending on which group you’re in. Will you be dining off the seniors menu? Or should I grab the kids menu?
For the win! Perfect. Solid NO vote
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:33 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: A320 FO
Default

Originally Posted by GolferNJ
So you are a Yes vote? If you come back in 5 years with a No vote our pay will have been eaten up by inflation (say 10% down). If you vote yes, in 5 years this TA will have sunsetted and we will have a 5% raise, 1st class, minor RSV fixes, etc... Not sure how a No vote makes us better off in 5 years?
Labor negotiations are a game of chicken. We all know it. Let's see if they can do better.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:34 AM
  #24  
Nucflash's Avatar
Orbis Non Sufficit
 
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 788
Likes: 10
Default

Originally Posted by Mudge
My guess is 5 years off property. I don't want to come back to less than what I'll be leaving with.
If your 5 years holds up (probably accurate) then this TA would have expired 3 years prior. Yeah, your math totally makes sense. Makes me interested to know how you calculate bingo fuel.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:36 AM
  #25  
duvie's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,246
Likes: 0
From: WB Bunkie
Default

Originally Posted by Mudge
Labor negotiations are a game of chicken. We all know it. Let's see if they can do better.
I don’t think time is on our side in this case Mudge.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:36 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2020
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Nucflash
If your 5 years holds up (probably accurate) then this TA would have expired 3 years prior. Yeah, your math totally makes sense. Makes me interested to know how you calculate bingo fuel.
You start with an extra 2000lbs at the gate (assuming narrow body) and adjust upwards from there to avoid a bingo situation.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:38 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: A320 FO
Default

Originally Posted by Nucflash
If your 5 years holds up (probably accurate) then this TA would have expired 3 years prior. Yeah, your math totally makes sense. Makes me interested to know how you calculate bingo fuel.
Bingo is objective.. Market speculation is not.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:41 AM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Default

What is the total bill for this concessionary TA and how much are we actually spending to save the furloughs(temporarily)? The difference is hundreds of million of dollars. Hundreds of millions of dollars out of our pockets to fund Kirby's business gamble. If it's such a good business risk then why doesn't Kirby fund it? He doesn't have to because he's got Insler's hands in our pockets. Lots of promises, lots of fear, lots of shiny useless trinkets.

Don't worry though. Next time the company furloughs it will be different.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:42 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

I read and digested the TA over the last few days.

I voted this morning.

Nothing written here or anywhere else swayed me.


It doesn't matter if you're Yes or No, vote. It's going to be a close one.
Reply
Old 09-21-2020 | 08:44 AM
  #30  
duvie's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,246
Likes: 0
From: WB Bunkie
Default

Originally Posted by Poss
What is the total bill for this concessionary TA and how much are we actually spending to save the furloughs(temporarily)? The difference is hundreds of million of dollars. Hundreds of millions of dollars out of our pockets to fund Kirby's business gamble. If it's such a good business risk then why doesn't Kirby fund it? He doesn't have to because he's got Insler's hands in our pockets. Lots of promises, lots of fear, lots of shiny useless trinkets.

Don't worry though. Next time the company furloughs it will be different.
if Kirby truly had the latitude, I think he would gamble with higher staffing. He does however, have a board whose job it is to ensure he does not step too far out of line. The board answers to Wall Street. And gamble of that magnitude would not be tolerated IMHO
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HSLD
Major
100
06-07-2013 05:03 AM
73NASLC
Major
48
01-02-2013 03:05 AM
Slats Extend
United
67
12-15-2012 05:18 AM
Old Herk GUy
Cargo
61
03-13-2008 02:15 PM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
0
09-28-2005 10:08 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices