More Alaska Furloughs

[turbodriver]

Maybe one day we'll learn....

 

[Snapshot]

Speaking as a guy that is on his way out……………..

To the “I told you so” crowd. You seem to be living under some sort of delusion that the company had Zero intention to furlough before April 16th and decided to do so after crunching some numbers that cannot possibly be valid seeing how the new contract hasn’t even been implemented. Give it a rest. They’ve been intending to do this for quite some time, probably based on the disgraced thief Saretsky’s calculations. They definitely waited until the contract was settled to tip their hat, but make no mistake, a NO vote would have changed nothing furlough-wise. Whatever they’ve got up their sleeve, it was going to happen either way.

While picking up VSA with guys are on furlough makes you a dirtbag beyond all hope of reproach, the concept of VSA in itself is not a bad thing. Think long term. If you want to pick up some extra cash on you days off when there are no people on the street, knock yourself out.

There is now a provision for pilots to pick up time and boost their paychecks. This is a good thing. When times are good, you are going to love this. The real problem is that there are a select group of PILOTS (not the Association), that will exercise these options while guys are on the street at the direct cost of their fellow pilots.

Everyone that flies more than 75 hours, under any circumstances, regardless of seat or hire date is a dirtbag.
Period.
The Association doesn’t bear the responsibility here, the LINE PILOTS do.
If we all act like men of honor and individually decide to fly the bare minimum, we will all prevail. Of course, whether dirtbags will allow that to happen remains to be seen. I’m not holding my breath.

 

[av8instyle]

Speaking as a guy that is on his way out……………..

To the “I told you so” crowd. You seem to be living under some sort of delusion that the company had Zero intention to furlough before April 16th and decided to do so after crunching some numbers that cannot possibly be valid seeing how the new contract hasn’t even been implemented. Give it a rest. They’ve been intending to do this for quite some time, probably based on the disgraced thief Saretsky’s calculations. They definitely waited until the contract was settled to tip their hat, but make no mistake, a NO vote would have changed nothing furlough-wise. Whatever they’ve got up their sleeve, it was going to happen either way.

While picking up VSA with guys are on furlough makes you a dirtbag beyond all hope of reproach, the concept of VSA in itself is not a bad thing. Think long term. If you want to pick up some extra cash on you days off when there are no people on the street, knock yourself out.

There is now a provision for pilots to pick up time and boost their paychecks. This is a good thing. When times are good, you are going to love this. The real problem is that there are a select group of PILOTS (not the Association), that will exercise these options while guys are on the street at the direct cost of their fellow pilots.

Everyone that flies more than 75 hours, under any circumstances, regardless of seat or hire date is a dirtbag.
Period.
The Association doesn’t bear the responsibility here, the LINE PILOTS do.
If we all act like men of honor and individually decide to fly the bare minimum, we will all prevail. Of course, whether dirtbags will allow that to happen remains to be seen. I’m not holding my breath.

Not disagreeing with anything you put here, but there are a few issues I'd like to point out:
1- I have no doubt they were gonna furlough anyways, I just firmly believe that this contract etched it in stone and more than likely increased the number. Look, the efficiencies in scheduling are far better for the company, you have to admit that.
2- Not picking up extra time, no VSA, and 75 hours SHOULD have been mandatory items in the contract when there are dudes on the street. The fact that they were not leaves those doors WIDE open.
3- The "dirtbags" will be dirtbags and pick up extra time, fly VSA, and fly to 90 every chance they get, which makes this contract a seniority stagnation contract, period.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Not disagreeing with anything you put here, but there are a few issues I'd like to point out:
1- I have no doubt they were gonna furlough anyways, I just firmly believe that this contract etched it in stone and more than likely increased the number. Look, the efficiencies in scheduling are far better for the company, you have to admit that.
2- Not picking up extra time, no VSA, and 75 hours SHOULD have been mandatory items in the contract when there are dudes on the street. The fact that they were not leaves those doors WIDE open.
3- The "dirtbags" will be dirtbags and pick up extra time, fly VSA, and fly to 90 every chance they get, which makes this contract a seniority stagnation contract, period.

+1.

Why wasn't a VSA-during-furlough prohibition written in the contract?

What would be the argument by the company?

 

[turbodriver]

Cause this useless MEC said it could be done cause the company wouldn't go for it.

Of course those old geezers won't fight for the little guys casue they're so busy taking it all for themselves, so what'd you expect?

 

[av8instyle]

That's right! The union actually said in the road shows that they tried to get rid of it but the company wouldn't budge, yet here we are with a VSA system that is even better for the senior greedy f'ers. Go figure.

 

[MCDU]

Do not forget that all furloughed pilots have no career expectations and will be treated as new hires if you merge.

M

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Do not forget that all furloughed pilots have no career expectations and will be treated as new hires if you merge.

M

Unless you merge with US Airways, then your career expectations could not be close to even the lowest seniority 190 driver and thus every Alaska pilot will be stapled to the bottom of the us airways list. Then AWA guys below that. MCDU, your statements never fail to make me sick.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Why wasn't a VSA-during-furlough prohibition written in the contract? What would be the argument by the company?

That's right! The union actually said in the road shows that they tried to get rid of it but the company wouldn't budge...

The Company's argument is the same as for any organization that hires employees. Its cheaper to pay 150% to cover occasional flying than it is to keep an employee on the pay roll. Don't forget there is a cost associated with the benefit package you have to pay for full time employees. It figures out to be approximately 50% above the salary level. And that cost is critical now that the Federal Law has changed to require companies to maintain 100% funding for pension plans.

Alaska management has always been committed to increasing the ratio of customers to "FTEs" (full time equivilants)...their euphamism for full time employees. How do you increase the ratio? Either get more passengers/customers or reduce the workforce.

Why do you think Alaska invented the self-check in kiosk? Why do they outsource maintenance/ramp functions? Why did they invent the "airport of the future" where passengers check their own bags?

ITS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ON THE PAYROLL!

So, if they can cover 5% of their flyng with VSA pilots, they don't have to employ as many pilots. That's why they're adamantly opposed to "no VSA while furloughs exist" language.

Let's not forget one thing. It wasn't the Company that thought up VSA. It was the Contract '97 MEC that introduced that language as a "senior pilot's pay raise" during a concessionary contract negotiation. So, its OUR bad that the language didn't include reserve conversion protection. Its OUR bad that the program allows the Company to function at a reduce staffing level. Its OUR bad that the camel got its nose in the tent in the first place.

 

[turbodriver]

Like I said:

Those old geezers won't fight for the little guys casue they're so busy taking it all for themselves. Contract, '97 or contract '09, still the same principle.