American looking to "right-size" the company and staffing levels for the Fall and 2021

[Talos]

Are you people nuts?

Seriously?

Why should the government fund payroll for a bunch of employees the airlines have said they don't need? What your really asking is your fellow taxpayers to fund your paycheck while you sit around with nothing to do, most of who make FAR LESS than you do. Talk about UNION entitlement gone awry.

What makes the airlines so special that you feel the taxpayers should fund your paychecks? No other industry is enjoying that sort of protection.

The whole damn country has lost their minds. Extending payroll protections is only slightly less stupid than the federal government paying out $600 a week to laid off minimum wage workers.

Insanity.

The politicians are having a hard time dealing with each other and it is hard to see them reach an agreement any time soon. Could be the same thing with the airlines and the layoffs go into effect. For whatever reason, it seems in many countries the governments involve themselves with airlines and a few have bailed out their airlines already. It does seem kind of odd to keep people on payroll that are totally not needed. I guess pay them on the clock or pay them unemployment.

 

[1AA]

Are you people nuts?

Seriously?

Why should the government fund payroll for a bunch of employees the airlines have said they don't need? What your really asking is your fellow taxpayers to fund your paycheck while you sit around with nothing to do, most of who make FAR LESS than you do. Talk about UNION entitlement gone awry.

What makes the airlines so special that you feel the taxpayers should fund your paychecks? No other industry is enjoying that sort of protection.

The whole damn country has lost their minds. Extending payroll protections is only slightly less stupid than the federal government paying out $600 a week to laid off minimum wage workers.

Insanity.

So what's the problem?

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

So what's the problem?

..............

If you can't figure it out for yourself then I can't help you.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

I'm not one to say "I told you so." However; "I told you so". Some airlines, AA especially, took the "We are too big to fail" (or allowed to fail) financial position. I thought everyone had gotten over that mis- conception back in 2008 given the multiple examples of the error of that thinking then. I didn't think that to be true of any of the Big 4 airlines then, but now I'm not so sure.

"We are too big to fail" as a financial strategy makes about as much sense as a plan for the future that begins with "I hope."

no clue what you're talking about.

during normal economic times, the govt. won't intervene and no airline is so big as to 'it can't fail.' i believe we are on the same page there. thanks for telling us, again...but, i'd say most here are on the same page with you.

different times today. as trump as said, it's not the airlines fault. national govts. and american state and local govts. are doing their best to hinder travel, domestic and international. it's working. the american federal govt. led the way on jan. 31.

the govt. and corporate america told the world that the railway labor act was needed: To avoid work stoppages that threaten to substantially interrupt interstate commerce to a degree such as to deprive any section of the country essential transportation services.

ok, so, the govt. has acted and appears likely to intervene again to aid a certain industry (airline) governed by the railway act, that is in danger of interrupting interstate commerce (multiple BKs) that will deprive sections of the nation, essential transportation services...not by a work stoppage, but, by a virus.

the govt. has no problem with that. i don't believe the airlines do either..but, i do believe certain airlines will push for money and layoffs the second time around.

not sure what will happen, your guess is as good as mine.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

The politicians are having a hard time dealing with each other and it is hard to see them reach an agreement any time soon. Could be the same thing with the airlines and the layoffs go into effect. For whatever reason, it seems in many countries the governments involve themselves with airlines and a few have bailed out their airlines already. It does seem kind of odd to keep people on payroll that are totally not needed. I guess pay them on the clock or pay them unemployment.

many countries in europe and canada are doing the same thing. paying airline and other workers 75% of their pay to stay home.

as far as the airlines and politics..i believe there is common ground between repubs and democrats. top repub senators are for extending airline aid and trump basically said he also is.

the only issue i could see is if one party asks for other goodies and it's not a clean airline bill. once you get past that, the next obstacle will be layoffs = no aid, or, allow lay-offs and still give aid.

everyone's guess as to how this turns out, is as good as mine.

 

[1AA]

..............

If you can't figure it out for yourself then I can't help you.

I guess you can't figure out sarcasm.

 

[Rogallo]

I guess you can't figure out sarcasm.

Sometimes you need to splain it better!

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I guess you can't figure out sarcasm.

I can figure it out just fine but sometimes intent or the "spirit" of the message is lost in written language.

Honestly I thought your intent was to be a bit snarky like the infamous Dog Wonder but I see now I misunderstood the comment.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[swamt]

Are you people nuts?

Seriously?

Why should the government fund payroll for a bunch of employees the airlines have said they don't need? What your really asking is your fellow taxpayers to fund your paycheck while you sit around with nothing to do, most of who make FAR LESS than you do. Talk about UNION entitlement gone awry.

What makes the airlines so special that you feel the taxpayers should fund your paychecks? No other industry is enjoying that sort of protection.

The whole damn country has lost their minds. Extending payroll protections is only slightly less stupid than the federal government paying out $600 a week to laid off minimum wage workers.

Insanity.

I fully understand why the general public would think the same. However, be thankful that another extension will help save some folks from being on the street, regardless of the industry they are in. And-BTW- there are more than just the aviation industry included in these assistance packages. Let's just look at it as hundreds of thousands of Americans holding onto their jobs and not flooding the streets as well as unemployment numbers and cost as well.
This has NOTHING to do with UNION ENTITLEMENT! Yes the second push for further assistance was started by the unions at all airlines begging for an extension, But don't forget it was also the airlines, airports, and other industries pushing congress as well. This has nothing to do with only unionized jobs, it's all jobs rather union or not included within the job categories that "CONGRESS" decided to cover for a very important quicker and safer recovery of the economy when the time comes.

I don't think that is more costly than keeping a ton of employees the airlines have stated they don't need.

Yes, but the public needs to understand that a WARN letter does not necessarily mean those employees will be laid off.

I still think AA and even maybe United will still maybe have to cut the overstaffed employees, so I am thinking they may not agree to the extension and not receive any more assistance so they can take the road of layoffs, rifs and furloughs WITHOUT having their hands tied. OR, they will still take the assistance and comply for the time period (March 2021) and then pull the trigger April 1st instead of on Oct 1 2020. In other words I don't see all airlines taking the 2nd round so their hands are not tied so they can do what they really want to do and downsize, and maybe even more than originally thought in order to bring their financials in line.

 

[eolesen]

Or, maybe allow a higher % of layoffs now. It's not reasonable to handcuff the airlines into keeping everyone you needed a year ago, especially since there have already been deaths, resignations, and retirements that have already brought employment down more than what CARES allowed.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Are you people nuts?

Seriously?

Why should the government fund payroll for a bunch of employees the airlines have said they don't need? What your really asking is your fellow taxpayers to fund your paycheck while you sit around with nothing to do, most of who make FAR LESS than you do. Talk about UNION entitlement gone awry.

What makes the airlines so special that you feel the taxpayers should fund your paychecks? No other industry is enjoying that sort of protection.

i don't argue all of what you say:

- the payroll protection program does the exact same thing as the grants for airline payrolls from the cares act. in fact, i believe the coverage is more comprehensive. aa said that 76% of it's wages in the 2nd quarter were paid for by the cares act. many businesses have 100% of their payroll(s) covered. the small business administration will forgive the money distributed if that business meets all criteria set in the payroll protection program.

- there are things to do. it's not as slow as april and may..but, there is some work to be done.

- to hamstring strikes, the railway act was conjured up decades ago. it claims that certain industries are vital to the usa and those industries can't be interrupted by strikes as to deprive sections of the usa essential transportation services.

ok.

what's good for the goose...if those industries are that vital, surely the govt. will come to it's rescue when those industries are threatened by an issue - by no fault of those industries - that could decimate interstate commerce and deny sections of the usa essential transportation services.

multiple airline BKs would decimate and deny. use the same argument against those politicians unwilling to aid the airlines, but are first in line waving this act when labor talks break down.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I fully understand why the general public would think the same. However, be thankful that another extension will help save some folks from being on the street, regardless of the industry they are in. And-BTW- there are more than just the aviation industry included in these assistance packages. Let's just look at it as hundreds of thousands of Americans holding onto their jobs and not flooding the streets as well as unemployment numbers and cost as well.
This has NOTHING to do with UNION ENTITLEMENT! Yes the second push for further assistance was started by the unions at all airlines begging for an extension, But don't forget it was also the airlines, airports, and other industries pushing congress as well. This has nothing to do with only unionized jobs, it's all jobs rather union or not included within the job categories that "CONGRESS" decided to cover for a very important quicker and safer recovery of the economy when the time comes.



I still think AA and even maybe United will still maybe have to cut the overstaffed employees, so I am thinking they may not agree to the extension and not receive any more assistance so they can take the road of layoffs, rifs and furloughs WITHOUT having their hands tied. OR, they will still take the assistance and comply for the time period (March 2021) and then pull the trigger April 1st instead of on Oct 1 2020. In other words I don't see all airlines taking the 2nd round so their hands are not tied so they can do what they really want to do and downsize, and maybe even more than originally thought in order to bring their financials in line.

Frankly if I was working for 14 dollars an hour busting my ass as some contractor with no benefits (or benefits priced to where I can't afford them just so they can say they "offer benefits" to potential recruits, the new scam of corporate America), struggling to pay bills, and paying taxes every week for someone else who makes more than twice what I do and has benefits I could only dream of to sit around and do nothing I would feel pretty incensed.

I think if ANY of you were on the other side of the coin this whole CARES act and payroll funding for an industry that has little demand for it's service would piss you off to.

However it is lining your pockets so you justify it.

It's wrong.

Period.

I make no apologies for that statement.

 

[title 2]

i don't argue all of what you say:

- the payroll protection program does the exact same thing as the grants for airline payrolls from the cares act. in fact, i believe the coverage is more comprehensive. aa said that 76% of it's wages in the 2nd quarter were paid for by the cares act. many businesses have 100% of their payroll(s) covered. the small business administration will forgive the money distributed if that business meets all criteria set in the payroll protection program.

- there are things to do. it's not as slow as april and may..but, there is some work to be done.

- to hamstring strikes, the railway act was conjured up decades ago. it claims that certain industries are vital to the usa and those industries can't be interrupted by strikes as to deprive sections of the usa essential transportation services.

ok.

what's good for the goose...if those industries are that vital, surely the govt. will come to it's rescue when those industries are threatened by an issue - by no fault of those industries - that could decimate interstate commerce and deny sections of the usa essential transportation services.

multiple airline BKs would decimate and deny. use the same argument against those politicians unwilling to aid the airlines, but are first in line waving this act when labor talks break down.

the railway labor act goes back to the 1800s when railroads were the only transportation and they could shut the economy down and there were a bunch of small railroads that would go on strike and shut regions of the economy down. This was not good so they stopped it. No matter how much reality you say you are not going to get your good republican buddy to agree that that unions are ok or not destructive he has that mindset.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Republicans don't give-a-chit about ANYTHING, EXCEPT White Evangelical/Protestants, The Right-to-lifers, (The two biggest things that they HIDE Behind), and their Mega-Donors $$$$ and their Business's, and Last but by NO means Least, CAPITALISM, At ANY COST !!!

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

the railway labor act goes back to the 1800s when railroads were the only transportation and they could shut the economy down and there were a bunch of small railroads that would go on strike and shut regions of the economy down. This was not good so they stopped it. No matter how much reality you say you are not going to get your good republican buddy to agree that that unions are ok or not destructive he has that mindset.

What does the government paying someone in the private sector to not work have to do with UNIONs?

Not a damn thing.

Stop trying to spin.

Republicans don't give-a-chit about ANYTHING, EXCEPT White Evangelical/Protestants, The Right-to-lifers, (The two biggest things that they HIDE Behind), and their Mega-Donors $$$$ and their Business's, and Last but by NO means Least, CAPITALISM, At ANY COST !!!

Republicans are just as diverse as Democrats. The difference is we are not burning, looting, robbing, vandalizing, assaulting, and murdering people right now in the name of "equal rights".

I would hardly criticize Republicans and invite criticism after the damage BLM and ANTIFA have caused their fellow citizens and communities.