History of the No Furlough Clause
- Thread starter Trip7
- Start date
meyers9163
Well-Known Member
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Getting worried are we?
:rotfl:
Marcus, have you asked your LEC/MEC leadership about this? They'll be able to point you in the right direction. Although, they might just not want to answer it.
meyers9163
Well-Known Member
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Fly now, Grieve later!
higney85
Property of Scheduling
I hate this mindset. As professionals we always try to "Get the job done", but there are times where something is a BLATANT disregard for a contract and we get told to "fly now, grieve later". I know at 9E this happens all the time, then the grievance gets denied (regardless of how clear the violation is) and we have soo many grievances to take to appeal/system board that many people "fly now, grieve later" and all they did was help the company and got the shaft.:dunno:
Trip7
Well-Known Member
Yup. Union is telling everyone the company will have to file bankruptcy before furloughing another. Thats why im trying to see if there has been any case in History where a no furlough contract was broken without bankruptcy.
PGT: Sun Country went bankrupt so that doesnt count
PeanuckleCRJ
Poodle Wrangler
DL had a no furlough clause in 2001. Need I say more?
meyers9163
Well-Known Member
Need not Denny. Fact of the matter is if they need to cut cost and furlough they are going to. Period. Regardless of what the contract says.... And I have a feeling the senior union leadership (whom jobs would be safe), would much rather that then the company reducing their hours, money in their bank, etc.... Or at least thats the mind set I've been seeing lately. I've got mine so screw you mentality that MUST stop. But I hate to say it, but if ASA management determinds they need to furlough more, including those "protected", I see it happening. Perhaps not a furlough, but a FORCED leave of absense? Make a play on words.
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
Or your recurrent PC will get REAL hard
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
they could furlough all they wanted, and just hope for a sympathetic arbitrator a year or so from now. That was SOP at Mesa wrt contract violations
Trip7
Well-Known Member
Yup, Bankruptcy. Now enough said
I agree. Technically, the "no-furlough clause" has worked. If there was no clause I'm absolutely sure they would have furloughed past 56, which is just a weird number to furlough. Lots of people around the crew room say the company can do whatever they want. Well if they could, why didn't they furlough past the protected list then? We're definitely still overstaffed.
I'm sure though if the overstaffing starts to get rediculous(losing 20 200s in the spring) that the no furlough clause will be renegiotated. Just doesn't make any business sense to be that overstaffed. But so far looks like the clause has been worth more than the paper its on.
Screaming_Emu
Joe Conventional
good thing they gave up scope to get another one!
Screaming_Emu
Joe Conventional
Eh...I wouldn't say that. At least not right now. Come the fall we might be. But not right now.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Temp employees.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Yup, Bankruptcy. Now enough said
2001. Don't think they filed bankruptcy till about 2005. The money they got from the government post-9/11 was enough to keep them out. I think enough was said earlier.
Even then, here's the point: what's the penalty to ASA if they furlough? Money? Fines? Slap on the wrist? Odds are good if they need it done to save $$$, they'll furlough now and pay for it later....maybe. Worst case scenario, when it finally makes it out of the grievance process and legal system 4-5 years from now, they'll be forced to re-call those the furloughed.
