F/a's Receive Company Counterproposal
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
USAirBoyA330
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction score
- 0
700-
Thank you for that thought out posting. 🙄
Now, correct me if I am wrong but the company is saying they are going to open this VSNR $8,000 to anyone that wants it. So if they were only going to furlough 1000 and 2,500 apply it's going to cost a lot more money. I think it's a good idea but I just don't understand where this lump of $16 million or more will come from.
Thank you for that thought out posting. 🙄
Now, correct me if I am wrong but the company is saying they are going to open this VSNR $8,000 to anyone that wants it. So if they were only going to furlough 1000 and 2,500 apply it's going to cost a lot more money. I think it's a good idea but I just don't understand where this lump of $16 million or more will come from.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
USAirBoyA330,
This is definitely an area that's none of my business (where's Pitbull when we need her) but I'll only throw out this....
If there's a significant number of applications for the VSNR the company will have to phase them out over some amount of time - probably months if you're talking about 1000 and up. If that many F/A's left at one time the airline would come to a halt. So the price tag, whatever it would be, would be spread out over potentially 6 months to a year.
Jim
This is definitely an area that's none of my business (where's Pitbull when we need her) but I'll only throw out this....
If there's a significant number of applications for the VSNR the company will have to phase them out over some amount of time - probably months if you're talking about 1000 and up. If that many F/A's left at one time the airline would come to a halt. So the price tag, whatever it would be, would be spread out over potentially 6 months to a year.
Jim
USAirBoyA330
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction score
- 0
usfliboi-
OK... you think that will diminish the numbers? I am not sure who your flying with (or even if you fly at all) but I know almost everyone is going to take the money and run from that I am hearing. Heck, I am even seriously thinking about it.
Boeing-
Yes, that's true and I am sure they will stagger the leaves. So I guess spreading it out over two or three fiscal quarters would not be so bad.
OK... you think that will diminish the numbers? I am not sure who your flying with (or even if you fly at all) but I know almost everyone is going to take the money and run from that I am hearing. Heck, I am even seriously thinking about it.
Boeing-
Yes, that's true and I am sure they will stagger the leaves. So I guess spreading it out over two or three fiscal quarters would not be so bad.
networking
Advanced
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 0
BoeingBoy said:
The smart, sensible thing to do is give the agents a buy-out of some sort. Say flying passes and medical for 90 days. Let them qualify for unemployment. There would be so many takers that the company would have to phase them out too. The result would be joy among the agents and the animosity would drop considerably. Sadly the company is fighting giving them anything. They want them to walk out the door with nothing after 15 and up years of loyal service. Now the company faces a strike in the near future that could cripple the operation. If they would just work with CWA then maybe things would go much smoother. Why is this so hard to understand? They are NOT making a sensible business move.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
Just my opinion and nothing more....
I think the company is using the threat of 1113c to try to get as much as they can. If the threat works, they come out as heros.
The 1113c process is definitely a gray area of the law, so there is some risk to the company in going that route. The biggest risk (other than the labor unrest that would ensue and the possibility of work actions) is that the judge will deny the request because the company went too far in their request for changes.
As some have said, the judge has a "take it or leave it" role. But he can decline to grant abrogation and suggest that the company sought too much in concessions - more than necessary for either successful reorganization or to avoid liquidation (the two interpretations of what is "necessary").
Additionally, per the material in the link in the second post under "Good Faith Bargaining", abrogating a contract creates an unsecured claim for the value lost. Abrogating the IAM, CWA, and AFA contracts for a total savings of $600 million or more per year for 6 or 7 years would create an unsecured claim for billions, making these groups collectively (and possibly individually) the largest creditors the company has.
Jim
I think the company is using the threat of 1113c to try to get as much as they can. If the threat works, they come out as heros.
The 1113c process is definitely a gray area of the law, so there is some risk to the company in going that route. The biggest risk (other than the labor unrest that would ensue and the possibility of work actions) is that the judge will deny the request because the company went too far in their request for changes.
As some have said, the judge has a "take it or leave it" role. But he can decline to grant abrogation and suggest that the company sought too much in concessions - more than necessary for either successful reorganization or to avoid liquidation (the two interpretations of what is "necessary").
Additionally, per the material in the link in the second post under "Good Faith Bargaining", abrogating a contract creates an unsecured claim for the value lost. Abrogating the IAM, CWA, and AFA contracts for a total savings of $600 million or more per year for 6 or 7 years would create an unsecured claim for billions, making these groups collectively (and possibly individually) the largest creditors the company has.
Jim
Light Years
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,878
- Reaction score
- 0
The point of the $8000 buyout is that they will never have to opay you anything again. If they were going to be paying you say $40,000 a year, $8000 is nothing for the chance to bring back or hire a $20,000 a year F/A.
When would the results of this come out?
When would the results of this come out?
WestCoastGuy
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2004
- Messages
- 813
- Reaction score
- 0
The pay out is a drop in the bucket in the overall scheme of things with this company. They have the money and it wont make a dent in things. The company pays more than that monthly for delayed and lost baggage.
firstamendment
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2003
- Messages
- 1,348
- Reaction score
- 0
According to proposal, the $8000 is a one time deal whereas you can also cash in what vacation you have earned to that point, And yes, the company will stagger letting people go if too many take it at one time. One stipulation is that you can lose the perk if after you have made the decision you start to use up sick time. I guess the company feels this would really put them in a pickle.
I do feel many are looking for a crumb to leave. At least this is better then what we have seen in the past. Maybe 18 years of flying will soon count for something. If one is ready to leave the industry, this is your chance to at least walk away with something, as opposed to just passes where you are low on the totem pole.
I do feel many are looking for a crumb to leave. At least this is better then what we have seen in the past. Maybe 18 years of flying will soon count for something. If one is ready to leave the industry, this is your chance to at least walk away with something, as opposed to just passes where you are low on the totem pole.
firstamendment
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2003
- Messages
- 1,348
- Reaction score
- 0
BTW, also, you would NOT get furlough pay, BUT, the company will not contest unemployment.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
USAirBoyA330 said:
Its actually $21 million set aside for severance for the f/as. This is the money that could be used.
The company is hoping for 5,000 to take it, in which they could stagger the furlough in order to recall 1,700 INVOLs and then hire off the street. Why they hope we all take it? Because the average senority for f/as is 18.9 years...80%.
If that does happen, and too many folks take this, causing a "recall" for the company, then we may have a problem with Unemployment benefits. As it will no longer be conisdered furlough,( because of lack of hours) and viewed as a "quit" because of the "rehiring" for U.
That's the chance we all will be taking. If AFA comes to a T/A with this language still in the proposal, then all will know the details and risks with unemployment enefits. PIT has an AFA local meeting at the HYATT on Nov. 12. The Pres. will discuss this in great detail. BTW, all bases are invited to this meeting...just bring ID so local 40 knows you're not the "media".
Networking,
Since I most definitely believe that the company is "dismantling this work force", I did suggest to managment to offer to all employees in every group, even if they have to stagger it.
The company would love "entry level", off the street hirees". Trust me, its a fact without "outting" myself. 😛h34r:
The entire idea of the "Open furlough", is to allow folks who want to leave, and "bridge" to another job or profession to do so, and those who want the job no matter what the wage is, can have it.
Knowing in advance of this process, and what the company was endeavoring to do in the MEC's opinion, covertly, without the company blantly coming out and saying we are too topped out and they don't want us here ,and for us to say "yes" to a T/A and then make our lives miserable with displacements and horrific co. policies in hopes that we all then quit... this triggered the genesis of this "open furlough" language in AFA's proposal. (Boy, was that a winded sentence). 😀
And if the company perishes after we leave because of the lack incentives for the new hirees to stay...most of us would have existed in time.
IMO, this language is the only way ratification will happen for AFA. I hope this kind of "package" will be offered to all of labor groups so they may leave here with dignity, and let the company have what they want, and all the "wannabe" managment type folks of labor live with what they begged for..the company's survival.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
firstamendment said:
First,
IMO, it give folks a chance to get out of this place, and these horrible working conditions, that busts our morale....and set us off to "freedom" from here, with something...even though small. It will help you or anyone who wants it "bridge" to another job, and allow those folks who want to stay, no matter what the wage and condition or uncertain future is...to stay.
In my minds eye, everyone has the chance to get what they want....usflyboi, UYH, USA320...etc.. and those who feel they are not "entry level" earners and deserve better...to get out.
Ratification can take place. There also has to be a set date that the departures will commence. If the company staggers it because of the volume of takers, then those dates have to be in the proposal too.
If the company $%&ks with that...there will be no ratification, and we will wait for the judge.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Folks,
You need to know, that when the pay check comes on the 15th, it will put you in shock. Shows you what this company of managers are made of...while 24 execs received $23 million the last 12 months.. :down: Just bogles the mind.
You need to know, that when the pay check comes on the 15th, it will put you in shock. Shows you what this company of managers are made of...while 24 execs received $23 million the last 12 months.. :down: Just bogles the mind.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
Pitbull,
I assume it will be doubly shocking for flight crew, but that's just an assumption based on lack of knowledge of how other groups are paid.
For pilots & F/A's the end of month check is an advance based on the previous months earnings. Thus, our Oct 31 pay was not affected since it was based on Sep pay. The result is that we were "overpaid" on Oct 31 and it will be corrected on Nov 15, making the drop in take home doubly bad. In effect, there was 0% pay cut on Oct 31 and there will be a 42% (F/A) or 37% (pilot) cut on Nov 15 to make the average right.
So flight crew, and especially F/A's, will see some very small checks on the 15th....
Jim
I assume it will be doubly shocking for flight crew, but that's just an assumption based on lack of knowledge of how other groups are paid.
For pilots & F/A's the end of month check is an advance based on the previous months earnings. Thus, our Oct 31 pay was not affected since it was based on Sep pay. The result is that we were "overpaid" on Oct 31 and it will be corrected on Nov 15, making the drop in take home doubly bad. In effect, there was 0% pay cut on Oct 31 and there will be a 42% (F/A) or 37% (pilot) cut on Nov 15 to make the average right.
So flight crew, and especially F/A's, will see some very small checks on the 15th....
Jim
