cma2407

Did he mention when the R-day monthly requirement was going to drop to match the "super low BLG's"?

PS: Moneyman...words fail me.

MoneyMan

Like I said, I have nothing to do with the hiring/firing. You'd have to be an ostrich with your head in the sand if you didn't think the company is moving towards that. All I'm pointing out is the reality that I bet the company has plans to do that, so I was merely suggesting that enough screwing around and do it instead of all these fake bids and cancellations.

MoneyMan

That is different from what I got from my union rep. Last I heard we were 700 fat and 400 were going to be furloughed. So all bets are off if indeed we are only 300 fat. I was told that eliminating carry-over would immediately account for 300 pilots, so if all that is true, then we are good to go right now if we just eliminate the carry-over.

MoneyMan

You miss the boat and the letter wasn't clear. IF, and that is the big point, IF the company plans to furlough 400, there is nothing you or I can do about it. The information I had gotten was that we were 700 pilots fat and the company was going to furlough 400. So my point was quit screwing with their livelihood and lay out the master plan so everyone can make plans.

If you want to wine on your salary or whatever, fine by me. The fact is if I go from $250 down to $160 I will not make my high 5 and there will be no way to retire at age 60. Fine, I've got no problem with sticking around. But isn't that what caused some of this mess all the age 60+ guys not retiring. You look at the short-term, shortsighted viewpoint and I'm trying to look at the big picture BASED UPON CURRENT INFORMATION. Now if the company is only 300 fat and we can solve that with BLG and carry-over, go for it. That is a much better solution. But if they are 700 (or more) fat and we go min BLG (48 hours) for 2-years and then they furlough, what really did that gain? The guys you refer to are still making minimal wages and probably not able to make ends meet. Me, I'm fine (until Obama's tax increases and income redistribution and then I'll have to look at it again). If we keep the status quo, it doesn't bother me one bit. But does it help the very guys you are screaming about? If not, what would? What can be done to help the company while not sacrificing pilots, pay, or whatever? I saw no solutions form you.

navigatro

I feel bad that you can't afford a retirement based on $160K Hi-5

MoneyMan

So you want to work with your superlow BLGs? If that's true, then I withdraw my comments. I figured it would screw the junior guys big time, but if they are happy with superlow BLGs, then I've got no problem with it. Most of the guys I fly with do NOT want the superlow RLGs or BLGs. Many are totally opposed to the 48-hour ones that I guess are coming (according to a SIG member). But if that's what the membership want, then I've got no problem with it. But I bet that many pilots will end up voicing complaints after a period of time.

So I'm willing to sit back and watch all this develop for the next year. Should be very interesting.

Let's see how fast you are to jump in to help someone that may be forced to go to Hong Kong or downbid their seat. Are you willing to cover their current pay?

MoneyMan

Can you, assuming a 15% tax on the 401k (which has lost for most pilots 38% on average), a 7.9% increase in social security taxes, an increase in income taxes for those making over $150,000, and the elimination of the mortgage deduction. You are one brilliant pilot if you've accounted for this, and it doesn't even factor in estate taxes.

So you make your high 5 with $160K, resulting in the maximum retirement of $80K. I applaud you if that was your goal and you are meeting it. But I'll bet you that not many are doing that.

jagplt

I'd suggest you look at it from the last guy's perspective. He knows it's coming, he cringes every time an FCIF comes out, thankful for every month he lasts on the property. If we can keep them on the property one month at a time I'm for it. I guess we'll disagree on that.

I do agree with your position on carryover and the 85 ch trips being put on lines during low BLG months. That's BS.

Even if the furlough happens what's your guarantee that the BLG will go back to what they were?

UPSAv8tr

Guys,

Pardon the slight thread creep but I was wondering how the reduced BLG works over at FedEx? Are all lines built so that you only get 48 hours? If so, are you only working half the month? Are some built higher than 48? How does it work. Inquiring minds want to know. Sorry for the interuption.

navigatro

Yes, but I live well below my means.
In fact, I live in a van, down by the river.