Originally Posted by
Beer Baron
Is it?
2000+ pilots go to zero income to prevent (who knows) 2-300 pilots from going to zero income. It’s something we will all need to consider the merits of but I don’t think it is a ‘no brainer’.
Are the most junior pilots served well by being stood down with no leave for an indefinite period vs being made redundant and paid out accordingly?
I’d have though that a guarantee of re-employment, in seniority order, at the earliest possible moment in reply to a temporary reduction in MGH (as an example) would provide a greater total benefit to the pilot body.
The big advantage to keeping everyone one stood down, is that you are still an employee. You are still in the system, so when some flying slowly comes back it can be shared around for all at lower divisors and all can have a regular income (albeit less than before). Being an employee means the company has legal obligations to you, and should look out for your welfare as well.
Being made redundant means you are on your own. There is the redundancy list, but it means running the HR gauntlet again and having them approve more recruitment, which won't happen for a while I guess. HR may be happy to keep a lower number of pilots on higher hours than re-employ those made redundant? Not to mention the psychological effect of being made redundant. Anyone made redundant isn't going to be finding employment as a pilot very easily.
A lot of those at the bottom are in their first stable airline job, and at an age where they have taken out a home loan, just gotten married, had their first child etc. They are at a vulnerable stage of life and throwing them out on the street with a few weeks redundancy payout into an environment where airline employment is near on impossible is something I cannot do in good conscience.