ClueByFour
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,566
- Reaction score
- 37
PITbull said:It all relative. That's the point. Those furloughed provided employment for all those who have jobs today.
Maybe on the US side. Certainly not on the HP side (they were hiring).
Folks have this preconception that HP was in great financial shape before any merger. I can personally tell you from the high ups that I spoke with from both sides, that without merger partner, there would be no investors lured, no investor money and both companies would be on the cliff. U closer to that cliff than HP by year's end.
I'd expect that to be the line from CCY. US was already hanging over the cliff--without the merger it's lights out. HP had not even gone Chapter 11 yet. HP did not "need" US.
I'm sure we will agree to disagree on that premise, but that's the crux--HP folks had some degree of expectation of a job. In the grander scheme of things, that's much more than US folks had (much less furloughees).
HP and U have this furough language in their contracts on accrual of seniority while on furlough. Now that there is a merger, its all of a sudden profoundly unfair?
In the context of this merger, it's brutally unfair. I'm not saying that in the case of each standalone entity it's unfair (although I do think the concept to be a bit flawed).
U happens to be the airline that sacrificed 3 concessions and 7,500 folks on furlough to keep the airline floating. Otherwise there would have been no investors.
That assumes HP needed them--nebulous. US was DOA without it. HP made money in it's last standalone quarter. To imply that US folks on furlough somehow "saved" a job at HP is a stretch at best (and justification for the silly AFA integration policies at worst).
So what now? We punish the folks that went out on furlough by arbitrarily changing the CBA.
Or you punish those who had all sorts of expectations of moving up the ladder at HP. "Punish" assumes that you accept the premise that someone on furlough is or should accure and maintain bidding seniority ahead of someone who brought a job to the merger. I think that's crazy, but I don't work in a union shop.
To safisfy whom exactly? AFA is guided by the policies that are set and the contract language that was negotiated.
Best way to decide this argument is to bring it to the AFA Board who don't have a dog in this fight and let the Board decide whether its fair to change the policy at this juncture. With regard to USAirways CBA and HP, you can't just pluck out the language as if accruing seniority while on furlough has no significance anymore.
[post="306956"][/post]
Accuring seniority on furlough at US as a standalone carrier makes sense. The merger makes things sticky.
Again, I have a hard time dreaming of any other situation where somebody who has been effectively laid off from their job is recalled and is put in a situation to vault over people who had a job at the time of the merger.