|
Originally Posted by bugman61
(Post 3669958)
The company isn’t going to pay anyone who can’t legally fly a trip. They already have a system that blocks people in pbs and pcs from being awarded trips to destinations they can’t go to. Best case for those guys would be reserve guarantee.
|
Originally Posted by bugman61
(Post 3669958)
The company isn’t going to pay anyone who can’t legally fly a trip. They already have a system that blocks people in pbs and pcs from being awarded trips to destinations they can’t go to. Best case for those guys would be reserve guarantee.
|
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 3669948)
Yes - unless the ICAO rule changes which will happen sooner or later. Does anyone know the current age in Japan?
Scoop I heard that ICAO hasn't even started looking at this, and for them, 2 - 3 years would be blazing fast. This is going to shape up into an unholy mess. Unless that was the plan from the start. |
Originally Posted by Extenda
(Post 3669978)
It’s effectively the same though. Pay half the category to sit reserve able to fly 0-10% of the rotations making 78 dollars a month? Again, a disaster for flight ops.
|
Originally Posted by Extenda
(Post 3669978)
It’s effectively the same though. Pay half the category to sit reserve able to fly 0-10% of the rotations making 78 dollars a month? Again, a disaster for flight ops.
|
Originally Posted by Alexander12
(Post 3670008)
what a freaking sweet deal for the 65 year plus group….. just sit home and collect paychecks.
|
Originally Posted by Meme In Command
(Post 3670013)
Would it be cheaper for the company to just offer another VEOP?
Either way, this is going to be a colossal windfall for the winning pilots. Probably 2% of the industry. |
Originally Posted by Alexander12
(Post 3670008)
what a freaking sweet deal for the 65 year plus group….. just sit home and collect paychecks.
I don’t think very many of these opportunists have done their homework. |
Originally Posted by Alexander12
(Post 3670008)
what a freaking sweet deal for the 65 year plus group….. just sit home and collect paychecks.
It won’t be a windfall of pay for no work like the vocal minority is so fond of. Remember the min balance plan? |
Originally Posted by TED74
(Post 3669933)
As an academic discussion, it would be worth defining “slow down”. I’d argue just about everyone slows down in their march toward their seniority zenith. And of course if one is already at or near their zenith (let’s call them the cash-grabbers if they are the advocates), they will get a pause of up to two years in that prime spot.
People keep trying to console themselves with current movement, and I’d suggest that’s a dangerous distraction. The real and most destructive effect of 67 is to drag the promised land (which is different for everyone) two years to the right. Only if you’re already there is that a good thing. Say you’ve been projecting yourself to be in the top 6-9% of seniority in your last two years with the company, and you like the prospects of where that puts you in your desired category… You can still have that, but you’ll wait two extra years to achieve it. That fact will never change no matter how much hiring we’re doing now, and no matter how much you do or don’t feel the effects of age 67 right now. And if you’re not going to “participate” in age 67 because you’ve planned and/or budgeted to walk at 65, your last two years will instead be perhaps 9-12% with corresponding hits to seniority and earnings potential. That could also affect your budgeting, of course. Perhaps you were going to be happy walking away at 60 because you’ll have TRICARE and your final two years were possibly going to be as a WBA plug or top-5 in some WBB seat? Now you’ll never touch WBA and you might instead sit 30 seats lower at WBB. Don’t take your eyes off the ball because the sting is delayed, folks. Age 67 (and beyond) is crushing to the future you. Don’t give in while there’s still a fight to be fought. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:29 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands