Netjets Announces Aircraft Order

[Blueridgeflyer]

I am at the bottom of the list and I would love for them to furlough me. With all of the training cycles coming up I don't see this happening. They will put the threat out there but it won't get the response they are looking for. Then again I could be wrong.

The suspense is killing me.

The discussion of additional furloughs has been omnipresent since the Fall of '10 although primarily articulated through NJASAP. The company has said that there are no plans to RIF "at this time" for several years. I think the window of a realistic furlough has closed for a variety of reasons. Sure they probably could, but why spend the perceived negotiating capital now before sect 6?

 

[CALRepublic]

The discussion of additional furloughs has been omnipresent since the Fall of '10 although primarily articulated through NJASAP. The company has said that there are no plans to RIF "at this time" for several years. I think the window of a realistic furlough has closed for a variety of reasons. Sure they probably could, but why spend the perceived negotiating capital now before sect 6?

back in the late 80s a reporter for the NYTimes interviewd some airline CEO, I believe it was Eastern's. He asked the CEO if he was "worried about his pilots complaining aobut the contract"... He said " they're pilots, I don't worry when they complain, I worry when they're quite"

these guys are going to b*tch no matter what. That's what pilots do.

 

[realityman]

The discussion of additional furloughs has been omnipresent since the Fall of '10 although primarily articulated through NJASAP. The company has said that there are no plans to RIF "at this time" for several years. I think the window of a realistic furlough has closed for a variety of reasons. Sure they probably could, but why spend the perceived negotiating capital now before sect 6?

Wrong.

Too much involved for me to bother with a lengthy post explaining everything, but JH started talking furloughs at the management 'meet and greet' during recurrent less than 5 days after the completion of the Eboard elections. Very suspicious timing. But again, not going into that part of it.

The point is, yes, the company is already throwing out the possibility of furloughs if we don't give concessions.

 

[NJAowner]

Not justifying it -- but if concenssions are needed it is because business is down -- not growing as people may think or be led to believe. Retaining existing owners should be one of the highest priorities of management.

 

[realityman]

Not justifying it -- but if concenssions are needed it is because business is down -- not growing as people may think or be led to believe. Retaining existing owners should be one of the highest priorities of management.

I certainly agree with your last sentence!

As for concessions, not gonna happen. If the company is shrinking, then furloughs may actually be necessary. But concessions will not save anything. Just look at the airlines. Every time management has promised no furloughs if concessions are given, when concessions were given, furloughs happened a short time later anyway.

Let me ask you this. Has your contract with Netjets changed at all? Have your management fees gone down? No? Well, part of what those management fees cover is pilot salaries and benefits. So if there are fewer owners, we may need fewer pilots, but the money coming from management fees should still be sufficient to cover at least the current salary and benefits package of the pilots who remain. If not, then the company has bigger problems than anything concessions will fix.

Profits recovered from labor concessions will not be a real business win for Netjets. If the only way Netjets can survive is with labor concessions then the company is already doomed. I'd rather go out making full pay and benefits (would allow me to save more for unemployment) than give concessions to a dieing company.

At any rate, despite the shrinkage of the company, they are posting profits. Don't see a need for concessions. Now, some will argue that they are cooking the books to show profits that aren't really there. Well, that may be true. Thing is, I have no way of verifying it one way or the other. All I can go on is the fact that the company says they are making money, even while shrinking. Therefore, I have no intention on giving a single thing back to a company that claims to be doing well.

 

[Praetorian]

Not justifying it -- but if concenssions are needed it is because business is down -- not growing as people may think or be led to believe. Retaining existing owners should be one of the highest priorities of management.

Historically management teams have used the threat of furlows to extract consessions from pilots unions.

But allowing these threats to work is much like negotiating with throrists who have taken hostages.

Besides, air carrier need for pilots has always been tied directly and almost exclusively to demand, not pfofitability.

 

[gutshotdraw]

I agree that concessions have never saved jobs in the aviation industry.

That aside, I still maintain there is a good chance the company will extend the contract for three years. Predictable costs and relative "labor peace" are helpful while trying desperately to maintain current owners.

We'll talk again in November to see if I'm right, or if we're screwed...

 

[imacdog]

If management wants labor peace then it's certainly going about it the wrong way.

 

[Blueridgeflyer]

Wrong.

Too much involved for me to bother with a lengthy post explaining everything, but JH started talking furloughs at the management 'meet and greet' during recurrent less than 5 days after the completion of the Eboard elections. Very suspicious timing. But again, not going into that part of it.

The point is, yes, the company is already throwing out the possibility of furloughs if we don't give concessions.

We are probably splitting hairs. The company has made no official announcement about additional furloughs. In fact, when pressed, they continue to tout the aforementioned disclaimer. JHs extemporaneous comments were pure conjecture that dealt with hypotheticals involving a potential section 6. I see nothing immenating from him that isn't fairly standard practice in the industry.

 

[LAZYB]

If I was to rely on the company "communication".... uke: