AS Furlough Mitigation

[AKMD80GUY]

The ink isn't even dry and here comes the camel sticking his nose into the tent. In an effort to prevent additional furloughs and downgrades, the company out of the kindness of their heart, has offered us a way to POSSIBLY reduce furloughs and downgrades by significantly adjusting section 25. These adjustments will be in the form of major changes to the QOL and pay sections to our contract. All these changes DO NOT guarantee that these furloughs will not happen.

As with anything that requires a vote, I ask that you read the whole document. This is changing the lives of the entire group to again possibly save a very few. And anyone that thinks furloughs are coming hasn't been paying attention to the fact that we can't staff the airline. When the CP is sending out letters begging for pilots to fly overtime, you know there is a problem.

This last contract passed by 84%. It is time that the company AND the pilots start to live by that contract. Enough is enough. Vote NO. Get the 65 back first and then we can talk. We need to show unity now more than ever.

 

[Mea25000]

I think it looks pretty good. lines 75-80 max 83 RSV line is still 79 slight VSA change but who cares about that well some 62 year old but he is going to vote no anyways. If this goes through there will be no more furloughs. I fly 75 hours or as close as I can anyways whats the big deal help someone else out. This will be a close vote we have a lot of selfish people over here who will hid behind the "only 30 guys are being helped here" argument... sad.

 

[Green Banana]

What is wrong with it? All it will do is limit the amount that people can MAX out at. It will not change time off, Duty day, or QoL. As for the comment that it will not guarentee more furloughs, They will never agree to that. What if pax loads crash for some reason. No airline would ever promise that. This whole thing can go away if that happens anyway. Then the pilots that want to, can go back to thier whorish ways.

 This program will terminate automatically if the Company elects to furlough while this program is in effect and both​

parties do not agree to extend the program.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Furlough mitigation? Nope. Never heard of it.

 

[becket]

The contract was JUST SIGNED. My guess is they aren't planning on those 30 furloughs anyway and want to scare the pilots into some short term concessions.

 

[Baze]

becket,

They are going to furlough. Make not mistake about it. They'll do it just to keep pressure on this pilot group.

With that said, as one with his head on the chopping block, I do not yet like the MOU that is going out to memrat to supposedly mitigate 30 of the 54 furloughs.

They want this pilot group to take a huge hit in QOL just to possibly/maybe save 30 FOs for the time being. Mgmt could come back, for example, and say they are going to furlough the 30 come January anyway.

There are too many strings attached to this furlough mitigation MOU. They are trying to get from us what they couldn't during contract negotiations. I'm not sure if we should give it to them, even if it's going to cost me and 53 others their jobs. I'm looking at this long-term.

These changes are supposed to be "temporary", but they will set a precedent and the company will want to make them permanent.

Plus, this MOU is going to do NOTHING to bring back the 60 who have been cut loose already.

Just some random thoughts... feel free to throw them rotten tomatoes at me.

Baze

 

[Mookie]

voted yes.

time for us to step up and show the 60 and soon to possibly 54 that we give a shaet about their plight. time to share the pain even if we are going to keep our job, keep our base, and some semblance of quality of life.

Mookie

 

[mach none]

The contract was JUST SIGNED. My guess is they aren't planning on those 30 furloughs anyway and want to scare the pilots into some short term concessions.

Contract has not been signed yet.

 

[Mea25000]

Yeah that is kind of funny why hasn't the company signed the contract yet??? Makes no sense to me

 

[Fubijaakr]

Regardless of how you vote EVERYONE needs to vote. This demands a 100% turnout.

 

[becket]

Contract has not been signed yet.

Really? What's the hold up?

 

[Going2Baja]

This is about unity. What will the ENTIRE group do as a whole to protect the ENTIRE group? Can we ALL accept a change to prevent even ONE furlough? I will vote yes. The fact that the SEA LEC voted no tells me a lot about SEA. They are about themselves. Do I think loosing second step sucks? Of course I do! But as a dues paying member I trust that my negotiating team did the best they could and this is where it took us. "Maybe" save 30 jobs? They way I read it, this will GUARANTEE the prevention of 30 furloughs! NOT including the additional saved by the early out (should they take it.) I personally was on the bubble. I think I'm safe now. May I get bumped out of base, maybe. But I will FIGHT to the last breath to protect the the ENTIRE group, and this includes the 60 currently held hostage on the street. I've done 5 years of furlough, and it did suck. But life goes on. Vote yes in this MOU and save some jobs & families!

Baja.

 

[Mookie]

Baja,

Beware of pidgeonholeing all sea pilots....or we may start doing the same to u.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Dooplicate post.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Baja,

Beware of pidgeonholeing all sea pilots....or we may start doing the same to u.

Good point, Mookie. Besides, we all know that all of the jerks are LA based.

 

[Baze]

Pay no attention to them huarache sandal-wearin' surfer dudes from La La Land.

All kidding aside, next Thursday is a perfect opportunity for SEA FOs to attend the meeting for the election of the new FO rep. This is our chance to make improvements to our LEC. If you have the day off, go to the meeting and vote.

 

[Going2Baja]

Baja,

Beware of pidgeonholeing all sea pilots....or we may start doing the same to u.

I apologize...I should aim this at the SEA LEC. I know most of you are more interested in your snow blowers and lake boats than your protection of fellow employee's jobs and families. J/K...had to razz Baze a little!!

Baja.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

Let's not all get hasty and vote in another bandaid. Make sure ya'll read and understand the ENTIRE MOU. This MOU does NOT guarantee "no further furloughs". I don't mind dropping down to even 70 hours if it means that we will get everyone back/prevent further furloughs, but this doesn't sound good from what I've read so far.

 

[Snapshot]

With that said, as one with his head on the chopping block, I do not yet like the MOU that is going out to memrat to supposedly mitigate 30 of the 54 furloughs.

These changes are supposed to be "temporary", but they will set a precedent and the company will want to make them permanent.

Plus, this MOU is going to do NOTHING to bring back the 60 who have been cut loose already.

Baze

It says in black and white that it will save 30 guys. It also is very clear that, at the absolute longest, it dies in a little over a year. True, it does nothing to save the 60 already out there, that'll be up to us individually.
The lines will still be built to 83 hours. The only real QOL I see is that you'll have to work a little harder to find someone to trade with pilot-to-pilot instead of Second Step. Small price to pay to save 30 families, if you ask me.

Gotta say I'm a little surprised. I figured this would have a bare minimum of 30 yes votes. To think that you'd sacrifice your job so that VSA guys can still get 150% blows my mind. I applaud your thinking long term, but submit that this is a short term proposal that will help bridge the gap till the 65ers are out.

Cheers.

 

[Tatoosh65]

Looks like a small sacrifice to me. Very small.
Tatoosh

 

[Baze]

snapshot,

Thanks for the response. I appreciate your thoughts on this matter. Mind you, my post came after the first time I read the MOU. I've read over it a couple more times since then and discussed it with others.

I voted for it last night.
Only time will tell whether this MOU is going to help this pilot group, especially those on furlough. I hope the MEC has figured out their next 10 moves in this chess game.

It says in black and white that it will save 30 guys. It also is very clear that, at the absolute longest, it dies in a little over a year. True, it does nothing to save the 60 already out there, that'll be up to us individually.
The lines will still be built to 83 hours. The only real QOL I see is that you'll have to work a little harder to find someone to trade with pilot-to-pilot instead of Second Step. Small price to pay to save 30 families, if you ask me.

Gotta say I'm a little surprised. I figured this would have a bare minimum of 30 yes votes. To think that you'd sacrifice your job so that VSA guys can still get 150% blows my mind. I applaud your thinking long term, but submit that this is a short term proposal that will help bridge the gap till the 65ers are out.

Cheers.

 

[Going2Baja]

It says in black and white that it will save 30 guys. It also is very clear that, at the absolute longest, it dies in a little over a year. True, it does nothing to save the 60 already out there, that'll be up to us individually.
The lines will still be built to 83 hours. The only real QOL I see is that you'll have to work a little harder to find someone to trade with pilot-to-pilot instead of Second Step. Small price to pay to save 30 families, if you ask me.

Gotta say I'm a little surprised. I figured this would have a bare minimum of 30 yes votes. To think that you'd sacrifice your job so that VSA guys can still get 150% blows my mind. I applaud your thinking long term, but submit that this is a short term proposal that will help bridge the gap till the 65ers are out.

Cheers.

Great post! This might have had a chance until the latest negotiators notepad was sent. Why doesn't SEA MEC just say "vote NO" What a crock of $h!t!

Baja.

 

[igneousy2]

What's the problem with the Notepad?...I thought it was good. Perhaps it pushes people away from what you want but that doesn't change the fact that it's true.

I think it's important for people to know that this was not a negotiated for agreement but essentially terms laid out by the company in a take-it or leave-it fashion.

That being said, we can't let our egos decide if we should take this or not...just because it's "take it or leave it" doesn't mean we should leave-it just to make a point.

I'm not sure how I feel about this MOU mostly because as I have never been a line holder, I'm not sure what the ramifications of losing 2nd step trading is.

2nd step trading to me means one more week of waiting for my schedule.

What does the elimination of 2nd step trading mean to a line holder? Why is that superior to picking up open flying during 1st step or after the bids are closed?

As far as I can tell from the MOU there are really only two things we are giving up...max down to 80-83...and no 2nd step. Where is the "major changes to the QOL and pay sections" of our contract? Is it the training and vacation calculations? How much different does this change those calculations?

I usually don't go by what I hear on the line but some of the reactions have been over the top and I feel like I am missing something beyond what amounts to a 2-5 hour adjustment to the monthly maximum and one less trading period (a step in the right direction in my opinion but that's a whole other thread).

What am I missing? What are the major changes to QOL that I am just not reading in the MOU?

 

[Old School 737]

I don't like giving up 2nd step and I can see guys being pissed about it but I am voting for it cause I think it's the right thing to do and its not like we are giving up that much and its not forever! I hope! When are we going to find about the early outs?

 

[dashtrash]

The foot stamping and crying over the 2nd step is not what they care about at all. They love to say "I don't VSA" but take it away and the true colors fly. I don't think the company realized how well they could have broken us during a strike. They know now!

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

After a long hard look at this thing, I voted for this MOU. It's an "effort" at keeping 30 people on the property in these bad economic times. I don't trust our company, but it's an opportunity to do the right thing IMHO.

 

[Old School 737]

I hear that we did not get the min 25 guys to take early out but that tomarrow the company and union is sitting down to discuss letting the ones that want to go,
go any way.

 

[Going2Baja]

I don't like giving up 2nd step and I can see guys being pissed about it but I am voting for it cause I think it's the right thing to do and its not like we are giving up that much and its not forever! I hope! When are we going to find about the early outs?

Word today was 21 or 22 takers. The rules stated no less than 25 and no more than 30. However, Beck said in front of 30 pilots inc. Kemp & LAX CP that he would accept down to 18 and up to 40...Let's see if he keeps his word. The LAX LEC was also there. I think this needs to be passed on to MEC and make sure that there is pressure placed on the CO if they try to back out of this.

As for 2nd step - I was a line holder for a year and I did like the 2nd step. It was one more chance to better your sched. But since it's seniority based, I rarely got any trades I asked for. If I were a line holder now this would NOT be a deal breaker for me.

Ih8afyesmen said it the best : "It's an "effort" at keeping 30 people on the property in these bad economic times. I don't trust our company, but it's an opportunity to do the right thing IMHO."

I voted proudly "YES!"

Baja.

 

[eskimopilot]

What is truly sad is that a MOU is needed at all. With our fellow pilots on the street why do we need something in writing that tells us what we all should be doing already?
Ah that's right. This is the pilot group that includes those that brought us the B-Scale, industry averaged pay and arbitrated contracts. Nice.

 

[Chief Pilot]

I voted YES and I hope at least 51% do the right thing and vote for this MOU.