scoreboardII
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2008
- Posts
- 2,694
The argument of a bigger company providing you more stability and more money is unsupportable by the facts.
How big did NWA and AA get only to furlough?
Another example, If you sit at 30% of a given pilot force with a 1-3% "upgrade rate" and your company acquires/merges and becomes twice the size it was and you remain at 30%, you just bought a slowdown of your upgrade. Rightsizing will occur (lowering your %), upgrade rate slows due to size (you can't keep growing at 1-3%, you will probably stagnate, resulting in tripling your time to upgrade).
This all results in LESS money, QOL, and INCREASES you chance of furlough based on historic precedence. Even if if that precedence is SWA.
How big did NWA and AA get only to furlough?
Another example, If you sit at 30% of a given pilot force with a 1-3% "upgrade rate" and your company acquires/merges and becomes twice the size it was and you remain at 30%, you just bought a slowdown of your upgrade. Rightsizing will occur (lowering your %), upgrade rate slows due to size (you can't keep growing at 1-3%, you will probably stagnate, resulting in tripling your time to upgrade).
This all results in LESS money, QOL, and INCREASES you chance of furlough based on historic precedence. Even if if that precedence is SWA.