AA Non-Rev Payroll Deduction Charges, Proposed Change Possible.
- Thread starter 1AA
- Start date
OP
OP
- Thread Starter
- #50
We still do not know what the company is going to implement for the non-rev charges. Information came out about the changes and now it got quiet. Many are concerned about how the charges are going to be implemented for D3's. We also did not get any clear info if we will be charged before we actually step on the aircraft. What happens if one gets rollover twice? Will there be repetitive charges? Sounds unreasonable to do so but what is reasonable these days in the work place?
bob@las-AA
Veteran
I don't see how this is creating a disturbance in the force, No money, No fly, simple. No more payroll deduct, if it happens, get over it.
bob@las-AA said:
Because, if we have to "bank" money to cover the cost of upgraded travel...could be a real pain. Think about how much it would be to tie up funds for First class international, round trip for 4 D3's. Especially with the fact that WE HAVE NO ISSUES with the current system. Then...after travel, request a refund...how dumb and inefficient can that be?
ChrisUS
Senior
- Aug 20, 2005
- 449
- 72
It's like your checking account. Do you keep large sums in there? I don't. When I need to write a check, I go online and transfer funds. If for some reason it turns out I don't need the funds there after all, I can just go back online and transfer them back. Takes what, two minutes? Of course, now that the banks pay squat for interest, that's less of an issue. LOL!AirwAr said:
bob@las-AA
Veteran
If I didn't work for an airline and I needed to fly, just how would I get on a plane? Yes you would have to pay up front for the cost of the trip, this is not a new concept, you must exchange money for services. And the term "bank", shouldn't be that foreign, it called using you "debit card." Explain the difference, $400. taken from you now. Of $400 taken from your first check after flying.AirwAr said:
ChrisUS said:
It is not just like your checking account...that's an idiotic comparison.
I don't see what the issue is with paying for what we actually use. In today's world...we do absolutely nothing and it works great.
I guess the years of working under this line of thinking has clouded your judgement over what is efficient and makes sense versus what is inefficient and solves absolutely no issue.
bob@las-AA said:
Of course if you're paying for a confirmed seat...you would pay upfront. But that's not what's happening here...is it!
Tell us...what problem does is solve that we have to determine the cost of travel, put that money in a "bank", determine the cost of the actual travel, then request a refund.
Compare that to the process of travelling, then having the funds taken from your check. Which would you prefer?
bob@las-AA
Veteran
If I NR, and list my self for coach, and it is full and I have to get out, I must pay for FC. I don't have anyone listed on my list because this is the best for me. A family member asks for a ride, I reply sorryAirwAr said:
no can do. Buy a ticket and you'll be there before me. This whole thing isn't about what is convenient and what works for us, but if it is the most cost effective for the company. We as employees are not aware of the inter workings of this seemingly simple act of non-reving. And if a change is in the future, we will adjust.
ChrisUS
Senior
- Aug 20, 2005
- 449
- 72
We can agree to disagree since apparently no logic from anyone will change your opinion. If you recall, I said I am retired and this policy of banking upgrades just recently started. I haven't used it yet but seems simple enough to me. This also saves the company from having to send a bill to me and me having to write a check and mail it back. The company will decide what's best as Bob @las pointed out so your arguing and being insulting will get you nowhere. We will see when it all comes down in October.AirwAr said:
Similar threads
