I like the enthusiasm, but you’re never going to see force majure clauses go away. This Is definitely force majure and is going to result in “furloughees” getting squat. This is why a lot of us are having hard decisions regarding taking voluntary programs. Take it and get something, or gamble on 10/1 and get nothing.
No it isn’t. No jobs are posted on their careers page. Probably seeing a job site scraping a page that scraped a page that scraped a page, and well, you get the idea.The application for dispatcher at Republic is still active. Anybody know anything about that?
So you'd rather be reduced to part time instead of taking a furlough and unemployment? Personally, I'd take the furlough. Not every company treats their dispatchers like management either.This is why I think reducing staff to part-time hours is a better path to follow than layoffs. It preserves some income for all employees, eliminates the need to re-train furloughees, and allows staffing to be rapidly adjusted in response to changes in demand.
In my experience, a non-union environment regards the Dispatchers as management staff.
So you'd rather be reduced to part time instead of taking a furlough and unemployment? Personally, I'd take the furlough. Not every company treats their dispatchers like management either.
The application for dispatcher at Republic is still active. Anybody know anything about that?
Know for a fact a Major doesn’t have Junior Manning. So it can be done, depends, what’s it worth it to you?I disagree that an airline would be able to claim "force majure" at this point. In March when they couldn't cancel flights fast enough and everyone was canceling their tickets right and left, yes I think they could claim it then. However, with the CARES Act and knowing that they *may* have to reduce staff come October 1st, this does not seem like an immediate need as they have seen it coming for roughly six months.
I do agree with you MT that those kind of clauses will never go away, kind of like you would never get rid of junior manning clauses, no matter how much we would all like to see those go by the wayside.
This makes little to no sense. At any major, if you reduce your hours to say 50% you’re still making more than double what you would on unemployment. So why wouldn’t you do that? It’s a temporary measure. Oh, and you retain health insurance which is kind of important in the middle of a pandemic.So you'd rather be reduced to part time instead of taking a furlough and unemployment? Personally, I'd take the furlough. Not every company treats their dispatchers like management either.
Know for a fact a Major doesn’t have Junior Manning.
Considering that my comment was added to other comments talking about regional airlines and not majors, seems to make lots of sense. I'll pass on 50% regional pay any day.This makes little to no sense. At any major, if you reduce your hours to say 50% you’re still making more than double what you would on unemployment. So why wouldn’t you do that? It’s a temporary measure. Oh, and you retain health insurance which is kind of important in the middle of a pandemic.
If you’d make more on unemployment then I guess it would make financial sense. Depends what the state pays out in unemployment. In some states, reducing hours may still be more or equal to unemployment.Considering that my comment was added to other comments talking about regional airlines and not majors, seems to make lots of sense. I'll pass on 50% regional pay any day.
Not so at the present time, with the $600 a week the feds are throwing on top, it not unusual to make more on unemployment (admittedly, I don’t know how long that’s going to continue).Unemployment is based on a percentage of your earnings, yes? If so, unemployment is always going to be less than what you earn.
Not so at the present time, with the $600 a week the feds are throwing on top, it not unusual to make more on unemployment (admittedly, I don’t know how long that’s going to continue).
In NJ for example the max is around $713 a week. If I make $1,100 a week and the my unemployment then is $700 per week, with the fed upping it now it’s $1,300 per week. I’m up $200. As the original income goes down, the profit goes up as the fed portion isn’t salary based, it’s fixed.
I think when it comes to pay/hour cuts, the word temporary is key. With how much the big 4 has been spending in overtime (double time in particular) money in recent years, they all might find it to be cheaper to keep everyone on part time wages and a bit overstaffed to keep the overall wage bill down. Thus pay and hour cuts might not be temporary unless contractual language exists to reverse the concessions either at a set date or profit metric.
I'm honestly shocked some bean counter hasn't looked at the pure amount of OT being paid to dispatch and lost their mind.
Having lived off of unemployment when a regional went under a few years back... It wasn't much less than the pay I was receiving at the time. In fact it was the same after you took out the cost of gas money. Worked great for the few months I needed it. Obviously, individual results will vary since different states pay out different amounts.Unemployment is based on a percentage of your earnings, yes? If so, unemployment is always going to be less than what you earn.
This can be done entirely outside of the contract and without an LOA. If the company is offering employees to voluntarily cut back on hours (to mitigate furloughs), that doesn't jeopardize anything in the contract. I don't think you'll find any union willing to enter into any type of agreement that alters the contract.The extra 600 is supposed to expire at the end of July with no plan to extend it as of now. For dispatchers facing an October 1 furlough or loss of money from pay cuts, the GOP wants another round of stimulus checks and the DNC wants the UBI from the HEROES act. Whether either or something in between comes to fruition, it could temporarily soften the blow of furloughs and pay cuts.
I think when it comes to pay/hour cuts, the word temporary is key. With how much the big 4 has been spending in overtime (double time in particular) money in recent years, they all might find it to be cheaper to keep everyone on part time wages and a bit overstaffed to keep the overall wage bill down. Thus pay and hour cuts might not be temporary unless contractual language exists to reverse the concessions either at a set date or profit metric.
You guys don't have a minimum monthly guarantee in a contract?This can be done entirely outside of the contract and without an LOA. If the company is offering employees to voluntarily cut back on hours (to mitigate furloughs), that doesn't jeopardize anything in the contract. I don't think you'll find any union willing to enter into any type of agreement that alters the contract.