20 ABX DC9 Captains Surplussed

[ABXbooger]

Was told in a bottoms up meeting 2 weeks ago that the number of furloughs in first part of January would be "more than 60, less than 100..." of course this did come from a CP, which means it could be absolute BS...

 

[erichartmann]

I am saying there will be no surplussing from the 767 FO seat, only furloughs. They will furlough from the bottom on the 9, then as the 767 training is done, they will FURLOUGH from the 767 FO seat. Dc-9 attrition will not be as a result of trickle down 767 surpluses, but simply from the 9 going away and there being a surplus on that aircraft. Again, I do not forsee ANY 767 FO's having an "opportunity" to go to the 9, only out the door.

Depends on how fast the DC-9's are parked. The junior 20 of the ILN based 767 F/O's are senior to the the bottom half of the DC-9 F/O's as are all of the MIA based 767 F/O's. I expect to see WARN notices to the bottom 20 or so DC-9 F/O's in the near future. The next 20 or so will get notices as the surplused DC9 CA's go through training (if they do). If not, then when the next set of notices comes some DC9 F/O's may be in a position to bump into the right seat of the 767. If that happens I expect they will sit at home on the payroll until the 767 F/O's junior to them get notices. Eventually you'll have 767 CA's moving to the right seat and anyone sitting at home with come off the payroll.

 

[abxaviator]

Was told in a bottoms up meeting 2 weeks ago that the number of furloughs in first part of January would be "more than 60, less than 100..." of course this did come from a CP, which means it could be absolute BS...

Like you said, from a CP. Well intentioned, but not well informed.

 

[nitefr8dog]

Surplusing is a reduction in force for a particular assignment/category. Furlough is "hit the road Jack". The 20 most junior DC-9 CA's can now "bid" to displace any crewmember junior to them in any other seat. All of the captain(s) in question are senior to the bottom 20 767 F/O's. They are also senior to 4 of the KIX based 767 CA's. Some of them may opt for the left seat in KIX (I would, just to get some 767 PIC time to make myself more marketable for the future). All of this will more than likely result in the bottom 20 767 F/O's being declared surplus to their positions, and they in turn will more than likely displace 20 DC-9 F/O's. Ultimately the bottom line is that the 20 most junior crewmembers will be furloughed unless someone opts for a voluntary furlough.

This is the beginning of the painful process of furloughing the bottom 2/3's or so of the ABX seniority list. The company's stated intentions are to end up with approximately 170 active crewmembers IF ABX continues to operate as an airline. Given the number of crewmembers out on disability anybody below #182 will eventually be furloughed. Looking at the seniority and bid lists only 98 of the current ILN based 767 CA's will remain, and only about half of them will still be CA's when this is all done. 42 of the current DC-9 CA's will remain, and again, about half in the left seat of the 767. All of the current MIA based 767 CA's will remain, 6 will still be in the left seat. 1 MIA based 767 F/O will remain and 2 KIX based 767 CA's will survive in the right seat. Everyone else will be gone. This assumes:
1) The company continues to operate the existing 16 767 SF's;
2) Everybody who needs to retrain makes it through training;
3) None of those currently on disability come back to the line.

Note that individual seniority numbers may, to some degree, be in flux. At least one 767 CA who had sufficient seniority to remain has found another job and resigned. Another has taken a leave of absense to train for another carrier, and several others are getting ready to.

A very sad day indeed. uke: :bawling:

That is if and I say if they train in order of seniority. My money says current and qualified. ABX has no money to retrain, contract wil not be followed and JH will go to court to get relief. jmho

 

[erichartmann]

That is if and I say if they train in order of seniority. My money says current and qualified. ABX has no money to retrain, contract wil not be followed and JH will go to court to get relief. jmho

While this may come to pass in the future for now it is my understanding that DHL is on the hook for the retraining costs under the ACMI. It would be very difficult for Joe & Co. to convince a judge they couldn't afford training they weren't paying for.

 

[nitefr8dog]

While this may come to pass in the future for now it is my understanding that DHL is on the hook for the retraining costs under the ACMI. It would be very difficult for Joe & Co. to convince a judge they couldn't afford training they weren't paying for.

DHL is on the hook for funding our retirement also look where that has got us! JH and company also could not open KIX per the contract according to the union but that did not stop them. Joe will not have to convince anybody just shut the doors and file BK.!

 

[erichartmann]

DHL is on the hook for funding our retirement also look where that has got us!

Retirement funding is a very complex issue. DHL will probably have to make up the stock market losses to restore our retirement fund to the level required by the IRS. It is important to note that funding levels required by the IRS under ERISA are not the same as those required by the PBGC for a "fully funded" plan. To close the plan PBGC requires more money in the plan to insure it can meet its obligations.

JH and company also could not open KIX per the contract according to the union but that did not stop them.

If you trouble to go read the actual CBA language you will find it does not actually prohibit the company from opening the KIX domicle. That was the union's interpretation of the language based on the written word and notes or recollections from the specific negotiations sessions. The company had a different view. If you read the judge's ruling you will find he did not find the company's explaination of the written word to be credible, nor did the judge find merit in the union's view. Since neither of the parties had irrefutable evidence that the company could or could not open the domicle the judge chose to read the wording as written and base the ruling on that. The judge indicated that the the written word "argueably" gave the company the right to open the new domicle while negotiating the necessary changes applicable.

The long and the short of it is the union misjudged the strengh of its position and attempted to use the domicle issue as a lever to move the rest of the contract negotiations along. While useful, it was not a strong enough position by itself to do what the union attempted.

Joe will not have to convince anybody just shut the doors and file BK.!

It doesn't quite work that way. Joe can't shut the doors on ABX just yet. ABX, because of the DHL ACMI is the only segment of ATSG that is currently making money. Filing BK for ATSG isn't really in the cards either, because it would trigger other covenents and Joe would lose the entire company due to the debt load. Joe needs to keep ABX operating, and he needs to lower ABX's cost structure. More is in play than simply our CBA with the company.

 

[ABXbooger]

DHL is not responsible for funding ABX Air's pension plan.

The money "promised" to ABX was for SEVERENCE, not funding our pension plan, which is a responsibility of ABX Air.

 

[abxaviator]

Funding of the pension plan to certain levels is a recoverable expense under the ACMI, thus making DHL responsible separate from the severance monies.

 

[ABXbooger]

key word here is seperate. Severance should not have to be negotiated, either, just another shining example of our great managment...