We seem to agree on most things
RubberDogPoop. Wile your post was the one I quoted, a lot of what I said wasn't directed specifically at you and more at some of the attitudes I've seen floating around.
Waiving the rights on notice periods was a monumental f
k up, no argument there.
Forans done his re-structure to the 70% Airline. Yes, we're carrying extra due to the AFFA and 50%/LWOP agreements, so if he turns around and sacks them he'll probably never get another agreement signed by the Pilot group as long as he's CEO. Rough math suggests the AFFA is worth about $30M P.A while 100 redundancies would be worth around $12-$15M, after 3 months notice. I'm going to
assume, further redundancies will be used as the threat to extend the AFFA and/or increase the cut (although 787 Pilots could not fit their current hours into a 75% roster). My only comment here is it's easy to act "tough" and "stick it to the company" when it's not your (not you specifically) job you're gambling with. I just hope whatever the next hurdle is, we don't play hardball just for the sake of it.
Over the last few weeks I've caught up with a few who lost their jobs. Some have already left due to 6 weeks notice, most are about to complete their 3 months. One thing I can say for all of them (who I've spoken to), is that they're incredibly relieved to have the re-employment clauses strengthened. Particularly waiving the currency requirements and the change of wording around "preference" of re-employment. Some took Furlough, but will re-evaluate before 3 years to decide if they'll take redundancy or not. Again, it appeared those most against amending that section of the CEA were so far above the Redundancy zone they couldn't hear the pleas from their distraught colleagues at the bottom.
I mentioned QF32 because there was no procedure for the specific event they encountered. There are various opinions as to how that event was handled, just like there are various opinions as to how ALPA and the Company are dealing with COVID... my point is, we're going off script here. It's even been acknowledged that the notional process wasn't really designed for a company wide retrenchment, but more for fleet retirements... there's a great thread on the ALPA forums which discusses "Perceived" Seniority Violations of the notional process after we were told Seniority is Sacrosent multiple times during the Zoom meetings.
Jim Jefferies is one of the better things to come out of Australia yes
We definitely should not make a habit of amending the CEA everytime we (the company) are faced with the unforeseen. But I also don't think we should outright dismiss it. I'd argue a global pandemic is a good exception. Even if the AFFA were extended for the entirety of Forans 800 day plan, it's still temporary, thus far more valuable than making permanent concessions. I do agree that a line needs to be drawn eventually.
The AFFA automatically rolls over every 3 rosters if the external operation is still projecting <60 IP for the nest 3 rosters, it isn't specifically reviewed, just has self extending/termination clauses. Once we get to 9 rosters however, it requires another Ballot to extend.
I will not do anything without thinking about it first.
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are some members (a minority I hope) who hold such blind hatred for the company that they don't want to think about it. They want to dismiss everything right from the onset because of some grievance that happened 30 years ago under entirely different circumstances... that was made painfully apparent from some of the accusations during zoom meetings. Clearly, several colleagues had not even read the documents, and/or have gone their whole careers without understanding how IP is prorated when not working a full roster.
Anyway, panic slowly, trust but verify
(I'd argue Verify then trust!)