There you go again. Giving stuff away. Also leadership has made it clear, publically, that the NEOs will be converted to A321.
Were you not the fool that posted that jetblue plots were whining about vacation.
Sucks to be you and consistently behind the curve on what is really occuring at JetBlue. After being educated otherwise using the same tone in the post sbove, you lpost a bold mythical prediction that only an additional 5% would be helped if we had PSIA vacation.
At least your ignorance is both bold and boundless.
You were a prefect hire for your cubical.
Where has the PVC been inaccurate? Post it.
They have said publically that the NEOs will be converted? Show me ONE press release or employee/investor communication saying that. One.
As far as vacation, I NEVER said that PSIA vacation would only benefit an additional 5%. I said, and am completely correct that if you DOUBLE ... (2 times, 2X (don't know if math confuses you)) the number of premium weeks (summer, Christmas, etc...), you will double the number of pilots who can take advantage of them, which is currently about 5%. By the way, PSIA vacation would mean we would have to change the way we bid for vacation to rounds of bidding, something you senior guys don't want to do. Either way, doubling premium vacation period allocation will help about another 5% of bidders, if you DON'T also change the way we bid into rounds of 2 weeks at a time. If you also change the bidding system into rounds, you will again approximately double the amount of bidders who can benefit from the premium weeks, at the expense of the senior citizens.
Now, changing the way we bid to 2 week rounds, helps more junior bidders have access to premium weeks, approximately changing the bid percentage to hold good weeks from 5% to 10% because senior bidders who were all taking 4+ weeks are now limited to 2 weeks(you know, like our peer set), without increasing allocation. This helps relatively more junior pilots, at the expense of the senior citizens, but has no adverse affect on the company or on bid divisors in trough months.
Doubling allocation of premium weeks will have the SAME mathematical effect on bidding seniority, but WILL have adverse effects on the company and the other 80% of the pilots. First, staffing of premium weeks (summer, Christmas, etc...) is THE LIMIT STAFFING FACTOR. If you want to just add ONE more week of Christmas vacation, you must hire one more pilot for every seat, in each aircraft, in each base. Same goes for each week of extra summer vacation, or Thanksgiving. This has a tremendous cost to the company. One of you said it saves the company 30-60 million dollars a year. That is 1-2 new aircraft a year, which over a career is very significant. If you believe the company can just give us another 30-60 million a year for vacation, plus an A321 pay override, plus all the other pay and benefit improvements you want, without harming the companies finances or slowing our growth rate notably, you must have recieved your economics training from the Willy Wonka School of Gum Drops.
Furthermore, those extra pilots will have to be carried during the trough months, so the bottom 80% of the seniority in each seat won't see the benefits from increased premium weeks of vacation, but we will suffer the low 70 hour lines 7 months of the year, and the slower growing airline which will effect our income, and QOL for our entire careers. Your solution of just forcing pilots to take their vacations during trough months is BS. First of all, it does nothing to relieve the cost burden on the company, so we will still be less competitive and slower growing. Second, if I am in the bottom 80% of seniority in seat, I do NOT want to be FORCED to exhaust MY vacation hours when my kids are in school, just so you senior citizens can have 5 weeks of summer vacation, Christmas, Labor Day, Columbus Day, and Black History Month OFF. I would rather save those hours to drop individual trips, bid open vacation slots that come available mid year, or sell back hours at 150% pay, instead of
WASTING them while my kids are in school.
As far as the PVC, many/most communications and surveys have been biased or misleading in one way or another. For example, a recent communication said that our pilot CASM was 30ish percent less than Deltas, but didn't put that number into proper context. Most sheeple will read that and come to the conclussion that if we were given Deltas contract, we would get a 30% raise. But that 30% number suffers from at least two significant errors. Longevity and widebody aircraft. You could give us Delta contract here at JB, the same exact contract, and we would STILL have a lower pilot CASM than DL. Our pilots have an average longevity that is significantly lower than DLs. This is especially significant with FOs, where we have many 1-2-3-4 year FOs on the very low end of the pay scale, as well as a statiscially small percentage of our captains on 12 year pay. DL on the other hand, has the majority of its captains and FOs on 12 year pay. Secondly, that CASM gap is very much affected by DLs widebody pay rates, which are much higher than our narrowbody pay rates. 1/3 of the their pilots are on much higher paying widebody aircraft that we DON'T even have. So, even if we had DLs contract, we still would work at a discount, as measured by pilot CASM. This all goes for United, American, and the longevity bias extends to SW and AK as well. But no mention from the PVC on putting those numbers in the proper context.
With that said, I am glad the PVC is exposing the companies lies and spin, as well as our deficit to other airlines pay and benefits. But they are OUR advocates, not the company's, and have shown significant bias in most of their communications.
As for you, I won't be bullied into silence by your arrogant assertions of my ignorance. I bow to no-one. Not the company, not the PVC, not you. I will assess all available information and make my own conclussions, and call you out when you are clearly trying to disadvantage those junior to you for your advantage.
So listen closely, GO F### YOURSELF.
