Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10410
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 3:14 pm

CARES2 appears to be buried in the primary COVID Relief bill being debated in the Senate. I have mixed feelings about this as I feel airlines need to make decisions based on the economics, but...

While details of a final coronavirus relief package are still unclear, a bipartisan $908 billion compromise bill under discussion includes an extension of the Payroll Support Program for air carriers and related support companies through March 31, 2021, as well as funding for airports. It would also extend the Paycheck Protection Program.

However, NATA noted that few details are available, including funding levels for these programs. Noting the limited time left on the legislative calendar, NATA warned members that “prospects have grown slimmer” for agreement on a comprehensive package.


https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... -extension
 
SEU
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:25 pm

What country is this? There are 195 countries in the world?
 
Sokes
Posts: 2731
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:44 pm

SEU wrote:
What country is this? There are 195 countries in the world?

The link starts with "The US... "
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10410
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:02 pm

SEU wrote:
What country is this? There are 195 countries in the world?

The CARES Act is a US law.
 
User avatar
green12324
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 8:49 am

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:31 pm

Speaking as a furloughed airline employee, the original PSP was really helpful and provided stability while we dealt with the whirlwind of covid. With that being said, the government dropped the ball on extending it in a timely manner, and we've been furloughed for going on 3 months now. A lot of people have found more stable jobs and/or moved out of state. Forcing the airlines to recall us for 3-6 months fully expecting to be laid off again would not be very help. I'll be happy to return to my airline job as soon as possible, but it was difficult to find this new job and if I leave then get furloughed again I'll probably be stuck loading boxes at UPS/Amazon struggling to make ends meet.
The views expressed in this post are my own. They have not
been reviewed or approved by my employer.
 
phxa340
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:48 pm

While I feel for airline employees, some of them
act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.
 
FlyHPN
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:30 pm

phxa340 wrote:
While I feel for airline employees, some of them
act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.

Have to agree. It hurts to see anyone lose their job, but propping up an industry that has been making billions in past years I can’t stand behind. It’s got to be survival of the fittest.
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 908
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:44 pm

FlyHPN wrote:
phxa340 wrote:
While I feel for airline employees, some of them
act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.

Have to agree. It hurts to see anyone lose their job, but propping up an industry that has been making billions in past years I can’t stand behind. It’s got to be survival of the fittest.


It doesn't make sense. I mean how can airlines get all these bailouts yet companies that RELY on air travelers for a huge chunk of business, like Enterprise/National/Alamo (EHI family) didn't (COULDN'T) get one penny to help them? EHI had to furlough and layoff thousands in April, my wife was one of them, even though she is back. I understand air travel is important but it all boils down to politics which sucks. I feel bad for ANYONE that has been impacted by COVID and as a result, are out of work. It stinks and I am sorry.
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:49 pm

FlyHPN wrote:
phxa340 wrote:
While I feel for airline employees, some of them
act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.

Have to agree. It hurts to see anyone lose their job, but propping up an industry that has been making billions in past years I can’t stand behind. It’s got to be survival of the fittest.



How can they survive if government restrictions (countries closed, quarantine) keep them from said chance??
If countries were open, and restrictions were not in place to keep people from traveling then yes I'd agree with you however, that's not the case.
Someone else hopefully will chime in but i vaguely remember that small businesses etc had/or may have access to grants but I'm not very knowledgeable of the details of said "grants" (not sure if they're loans) or however they can be called.
Some cities are offering rental assistance for those unable to pay rent, restaurants have the ability to do take out to try to lessen the blow, others have adapted to outdoor dinning, Amazon has made a killing with people buying out of boredom. I'm not saying that no other business is struggling, I just see that the airline industry has a right to government assistance given that the restrictions hit them pretty hard regardless of said "made billions" for the past year as we all saw them lose their shirts in 2 quarters. This whole thing sucks all around but at the end of the day, people are not traveling, businesses aren't running because there's a pandemic that hasn't been managed well and why shouldn't the one(s) managing it not bailout or assist all these businesses that are impacted by direct restrictions?
 
WkndWanderer
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:36 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:24 am

I think that a lot of the CARES supportive opinions we see on this site frame it from the perspective of saving airline jobs because there are so many current and former airline employees on this forum. Realistically, the rationale has more to do with the perceived significance of the industry in facilitating larger economic activity and the movement of goods, people, mail, and making the overnight interstate economy a reality. Not to sound insensitive, but if local bars fails, the barriers for opening new bars post-COVID aren’t terribly high. Replacing American Airlines and its perceived logistical role in greasing the wheels for the broader economy would be much more difficult. I don’t think the job guarantees were so much the goal as a necessity to pair with the bailouts to make them politically palatable. Giving the airlines $50 billion for them to immediately layoff 100K people would have obviously gone over publicly like a lead balloon.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:37 am

American Capitalism will reconstitute any airline that fails. The world is awash with capital (look what happened with the Airbnb IPO this week), almost new aircraft are available at rock bottom prices and there are plenty of qualified people wanting jobs.

Just like when Eastern and Pan AM went out of business, the remaining airlines grew and new airlines were created. Spirit, Frontier, and Alegiant and Breeze are just waiting to take market share.
    300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
     
    bob75013
    Posts: 1049
    Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 2:33 am

    Southwest isn't waiting to take market share, it is taking market share. New cities. New routes. And it probably isn't done y
     
    jreeves96
    Posts: 170
    Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 10:05 am

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 2:34 am

    phxa340 wrote:
    While I feel for airline employees, some of them
    act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

    Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.


    I also agree with it. Airlines need to be held responsible with the way they store and spend money. If 2008 didn't teach anybody anything about business owning and money management it's natural selection at this point. While it does suck that people are left jobless, don't be mad at the government. Be mad at your own airline for not saving. It goes for everybody. Everybody and every company needs an emergency stash. It's better to file for unemployment then sit around mad at the government that your company couldn't save their butt.

    I do predict that the airlines that retired aircraft early are gonna be hurting when this over. I feel air travel is gonna surpass the past peak. People being cooped up in their homes and wanting to travel. Feel like we jumped the gun on retiring aircraft.
     
    drdisque
    Posts: 1441
    Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:01 am

    jreeves96 wrote:
    phxa340 wrote:
    While I feel for airline employees, some of them
    act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

    Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.


    I also agree with it. Airlines need to be held responsible with the way they store and spend money. If 2008 didn't teach anybody anything about business owning and money management it's natural selection at this point. While it does suck that people are left jobless, don't be mad at the government. Be mad at your own airline for not saving. It goes for everybody. Everybody and every company needs an emergency stash. It's better to file for unemployment then sit around mad at the government that your company couldn't save their butt.

    I do predict that the airlines that retired aircraft early are gonna be hurting when this over. I feel air travel is gonna surpass the past peak. People being cooped up in their homes and wanting to travel. Feel like we jumped the gun on retiring aircraft.


    There is a lot of unsold new aircraft and its also like most of the newer aircraft are being torn up - scrap prices are in the toilet right now.

    Those DL777's, DL 717's, AA 757s are all just sitting somewhere. UA has the ability to take a bunch of 737-9MAX to replace the 757s they retired (the only thing they officially "retired was the P&W 757-200's), everything else is just "parked" and the only entire subfleets that were in storage were the GE 777-200's because their engine service contract made them more expensive to operate than the P&W's, but even a few of them are back in service, along with all 777's, although 9 767-300's have been brought back into service (all 30C "high density" 767's as opposed to the 36C "premium" 767's with Premium Economy) as I believe they're deployed on Hawaii and domestic hub to hub flights and Lima. All TATL, TPAC, and Brazil pax flights I believe are being operated by 787's.
     
    bourbon
    Posts: 172
    Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:35 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:50 am

    MohawkWeekend wrote:
    American Capitalism will reconstitute any airline that fails. The world is awash with capital (look what happened with the Airbnb IPO this week), almost new aircraft are available at rock bottom prices and there are plenty of qualified people wanting jobs.

    Just like when Eastern and Pan AM went out of business, the remaining airlines grew and new airlines were created. Spirit, Frontier, and Alegiant and Breeze are just waiting to take market share.

    AirBnb is just a web portal. An airline requires a maintenance program, licensed mechanics, pilots, spare part inventory, and more importantly aircraft. An airline is not just a web site.
     
    stratosphere
    Posts: 1983
    Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:02 am

    enilria wrote:
    CARES2 appears to be buried in the primary COVID Relief bill being debated in the Senate. I have mixed feelings about this as I feel airlines need to make decisions based on the economics, but...

    While details of a final coronavirus relief package are still unclear, a bipartisan $908 billion compromise bill under discussion includes an extension of the Payroll Support Program for air carriers and related support companies through March 31, 2021, as well as funding for airports. It would also extend the Paycheck Protection Program.

    However, NATA noted that few details are available, including funding levels for these programs. Noting the limited time left on the legislative calendar, NATA warned members that “prospects have grown slimmer” for agreement on a comprehensive package.


    https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... -extension


    As long as it's not a bailout I am all for it. Make the airlines pay it back. No grants. Get them over the hump and keep everyone on if they can then when the economy recovers they can pay it back. But don't put the taxpayer on the hook.
     
    MIflyer12
    Posts: 9339
    Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:28 am

    stratosphere wrote:

    As long as it's not a bailout I am all for it. Make the airlines pay it back. No grants. Get them over the hump and keep everyone on if they can then when the economy recovers they can pay it back. But don't put the taxpayer on the hook.


    There is no solution the way you have constrained this.

    Don't put the taxpayer on the hook = no government lending or loan guarantees. With neither of those, nor grants, you're just telling airlines to borrow commercially. If they can't do that or sell equity you're letting them fail.
     
    Silver1SWA
    Posts: 4749
    Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:11 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 6:06 am

    enilria wrote:
    CARES2 appears to be buried in the primary COVID Relief bill being debated in the Senate. I have mixed feelings about this as I feel airlines need to make decisions based on the economics, but...


    It’s clear at this point recovery will take a lot longer than we all initially thought/hoped but even with that said if the airlines acted based on the current economics they’d make decisions to fight a short-term problem that would have long-term impacts. We still need to get through to the other side of the pandemic for the economics to be based on natural market forces. Right now there’s still too many restrictions and quarantines distorting the picture, IMO.
    ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
     
    Sokes
    Posts: 2731
    Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:07 am

    Since government placed restrictions, should government be responsible for fixed costs of those industries that face said restrictions?
    Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
     
    MohawkWeekend
    Posts: 493
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

    Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

    Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:08 pm

    AirBnb is just a web portal. An airline requires a maintenance program, licensed mechanics, pilots, spare part inventory, and more importantly aircraft. An airline is not just a web site.[/quote]

    My point was that with the cost of borrowing money being at all time low, there is plenty of capital available. (FWIW Airbnb is valued on the stock market for more than DL/AA/UA combined)

    You are correct that those thing you listed are needed - it's just that they have never been so available and cheap. Breeze will have all of these and is well underway to becoming a formidable competitor to the US3. So are the existing ULCC who are already up and running and in much better financial shape than DL/UA/AA
      300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
       
      bigb
      Posts: 1254
      Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:55 pm

      MohawkWeekend wrote:
      AirBnb is just a web portal. An airline requires a maintenance program, licensed mechanics, pilots, spare part inventory, and more importantly aircraft. An airline is not just a web site.


      My point was that with the cost of borrowing money being at all time low, there is plenty of capital available. (FWIW Airbnb is valued on the stock market for more than DL/AA/UA combined)

      You are correct that those thing you listed are needed - it's just that they have never been so available and cheap. Breeze will have all of these and is well underway to becoming a formidable competitor to the US3. So are the existing ULCC who are already up and running and in much better financial shape than DL/UA/AA[/quote]

      The point he is making is the fact that it takes few years for a start-up to become reality more so than just money. A start-up has to work with the FAA to get various operational programs, maintenance programs etc written and approved by the FAA. The only short-cut is for someone to come in and buy a failed operators certificate before it is scooped up and dissolved by a competitor.
       
      Ziyulu
      Posts: 1080
      Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:35 am

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:23 pm

      Didn't SQ retire their 747s prematurely back then during SARS? It bit them as they could not find other aircraft shortly after.
       
      CRJockey
      Posts: 255
      Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:54 am

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 2:48 pm

      jreeves96 wrote:

      I also agree with it. Airlines need to be held responsible with the way they store and spend money. If 2008 didn't teach anybody anything about business owning and money management it's natural selection at this point. While it does suck that people are left jobless, don't be mad at the government. Be mad at your own airline for not saving. It goes for everybody. Everybody and every company needs an emergency stash.


      While one can be of different opinion if state aid is the right tool, your view on companies ability to „save some cash for bad times“ is a good advice for your normal every 7-10 years crisis of the industry. It is however, apologies in advance, a bit childish to imply that being a solution for a world changing event of a pandemic. No amount of „cash saving for bad times“ would have prepared anyone.

      For what it’s worth, I am a proponent of protecting and supporting strategic industries under certain conditions. And no, capitalism alone wouldn’t be able to replace e.g. American in such a short time, that it wouldn’t have negative effects in the broader industries. B6 (or whomever) isn’t able to grab up some 200 widebodies and go flying to China.
       
      User avatar
      NameOmitted
      Posts: 974
      Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:45 pm

      The U.S. Federal Treasury made money on the auto bailout. Much less than private capital world demand of an investment, but much more than our world have been had it been a grant rather than an exchange for equity.

      It's worth remembering in this discussion.
       
      MIflyer12
      Posts: 9339
      Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:07 pm

      Sokes wrote:
      Since government placed restrictions, should government be responsible for fixed costs of those industries that face said restrictions?


      No. U.S. businesses don't have a right to exist/right to profit irrespective of health demands (or sanctions on Cuba/Iran, or state of war..) There's a hundred years of law on that.
       
      MIflyer12
      Posts: 9339
      Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:25 pm

      bourbon wrote:
      MohawkWeekend wrote:
      American Capitalism will reconstitute any airline that fails. The world is awash with capital (look what happened with the Airbnb IPO this week), almost new aircraft are available at rock bottom prices and there are plenty of qualified people wanting jobs.

      Just like when Eastern and Pan AM went out of business, the remaining airlines grew and new airlines were created. Spirit, Frontier, and Alegiant and Breeze are just waiting to take market share.

      AirBnb is just a web portal. An airline requires a maintenance program, licensed mechanics, pilots, spare part inventory, and more importantly aircraft. An airline is not just a web site.


      Well, a few things.

      1. A major carrier failing probably means Chapter 11 reorganization, not immediate Chapter 7 liquidation. Lots of big U.S. carriers have lots of experience continuing to operate in Ch 11. Here's a list:

      (it's Wikipedia, so let's not call it authoritative)

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... ted_States

      U.S. bankruptcy proceedings are well established in law and (can be) surprisingly efficient in time.

      2. Why should the U.S. government eat business losses instead of lenders, bondholders, and shareholders, really? (Before you say 'Because the U.S. shut borders,' observe that there is no theme park, rental car, or hotel industry-specific bailout.) They chose to invest in carriers.

      3. You don't even need new airlines to form - all the major U.S. carriers have surplus capacity today. It might take a few weeks or months to reactivate and reallocate capacity but it's not as if the residents of Dallas or Charlotte would be left with no choice but to drive or walk. All O&D demand would be met, and connecting demand would be met thru other hubs -- the U.S. industry has plenty of hubs.
       
      MohawkWeekend
      Posts: 493
      Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

      Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

      Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:58 pm

      MIflyer12 - you nailed it better than I did. Even if an airline failed, the US would be more than adequately served by the remaining carriers.

      Mark Cuban is right - the aid should be given to the ALL citizens not companies.
        300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
         
        Vicenza
        Posts: 278
        Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

        Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

        Sat Dec 12, 2020 7:08 pm

        Rookie87 wrote:
        FlyHPN wrote:
        phxa340 wrote:
        While I feel for airline employees, some of them
        act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

        Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.

        Have to agree. It hurts to see anyone lose their job, but propping up an industry that has been making billions in past years I can’t stand behind. It’s got to be survival of the fittest.



        How can they survive if government restrictions (countries closed, quarantine) keep them from said chance??
        If countries were open, and restrictions were not in place to keep people from traveling then yes I'd agree with you however, that's not the case.
        Someone else hopefully will chime in but i vaguely remember that small businesses etc had/or may have access to grants but I'm not very knowledgeable of the details of said "grants" (not sure if they're loans) or however they can be called.
        Some cities are offering rental assistance for those unable to pay rent, restaurants have the ability to do take out to try to lessen the blow, others have adapted to outdoor dinning, Amazon has made a killing with people buying out of boredom. I'm not saying that no other business is struggling, I just see that the airline industry has a right to government assistance given that the restrictions hit them pretty hard regardless of said "made billions" for the past year as we all saw them lose their shirts in 2 quarters. This whole thing sucks all around but at the end of the day, people are not traveling, businesses aren't running because there's a pandemic that hasn't been managed well and why shouldn't the one(s) managing it not bailout or assist all these businesses that are impacted by direct restrictions?


        The survival of any business depends solely upon market conditions. Whoever doesn't survive (any business) will be replaced when conditions change - that is reality. In reference to "If countries were open, and restrictions were not in place to keep people from traveling....", no other country has any responsibility for preserving jobs/businesses in the US.
         
        jfern022
        Posts: 190
        Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 9:24 pm

        Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

        Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:03 am

        This industry supports many jobs directly and indirectly. The entry cost for an airline of size is monumental. It will be interesting how Breeze does at first. Is any airline at risk of Ch 7, probably not, but they still support jobs.

        Think of supply chain, vendors for parts, airport, cleaning, etc. The poster that mentioned their wife getting laid off from the rental car agency. Think of what drives much of their business. People travelling. If there was no aviation, think of what scale these things would really be at. Rental cars? Hotels? Cruises?

        The ability to move people, commodities, etc; is the greater good than a lot of other industries. Many industries are reliant on aviation to facilitate their model or to help their business.

        The capital needed to start an airline is not cheap. Look what it costs to purchase a narrowbody or widebody. Used ones are not cheap either. Factor in labor, supply chain, maintenance, operational costs. It's not like a hotel, car agency. Only the cruise lines can come close as far as cost per ship, and even then its not like Royal has 700 boats around the world.

        Even the cost for Breeze starting up is a lot. That kind of capital may be out there to a degree, but who's going to give it out.
         
        Sokes
        Posts: 2731
        Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

        Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

        Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:53 am

        MIflyer12 wrote:
        Sokes wrote:
        Since government placed restrictions, should government be responsible for fixed costs of those industries that face said restrictions?


        No. U.S. businesses don't have a right to exist/right to profit irrespective of health demands (or sanctions on Cuba/Iran, or state of war..) There's a hundred years of law on that.

        If there is war, I'm still allowed to fly.

        Sanctions on Cuba are more tricky. A company whose business depends only on Cuba will get bankrupt. Any compensation isn't practical. Every company who has a little business with Cuba will pose demands. What about a supplier to such a company?

        You think it would be o.k. if the government tomorrow prohibits the sale of cars for one year without compensating car manufacturers?

        Can the government prohibit the sale of cars for one year, but at the same time demand labour protection?

        What about coal power plants? A sudden CO2 tax may bankrupt such plants. I'm in favour of renewables and also in favour of a CO2 tax. But I believe investment security demands that the government has to compensate the book value. So if a coal plant is let's say 300 million $ and it's depreciated over 30 years, a 10 year old plant which closes down because of CO2 tax should get 200 million $ compensation.
        Otherwise politics should give a warning. If the law says such plants are to be depreciated over 30 years, 30 years warning time is required.
        So I believe compensation is the way to go.

        In Germany some years back we had following situation, which has changed still then:
        For midday peaks gas turbines were built. However solar cells provided for a high percentage of these peaks. Also wind turbines were added. Renewables get preference. Other power suppliers have to adjust. Germany has lot of old lignite plants which can't be adjusted. So only hard coal or gas could adjust. In consequence there were some gas turbines which ran only a few hours per year. They made losses and owners wanted to shut them down. Politics didn't allow, arguing they are critical for power security. But at the same time politics didn't think it necessary that owners get compensated for this insurance service for several years. I find this outrageous.

        Yes, business includes risk including black swans. But changing government regulation shouldn't be such a risk.
        Developing countries have a lot of investment risk concerning changing government regulation. I don't want to go that way.

        If bars and restaurants aren't allowed to open, same applies to them. Rent and salaries are to be paid by government.
        Last edited by Sokes on Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
        Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
         
        LCDFlight
        Posts: 948
        Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

        Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

        Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:53 am

        TWA302 wrote:
        FlyHPN wrote:
        phxa340 wrote:
        While I feel for airline employees, some of them
        act as if their job is more important than others (yea I get that’s going to be an unpopular opinion) thus requiring being singled out to receive government funds. All the while small businesses are being decimated and help not flowing to them. Airlines have been so successful at receiving funds because 1. Union lobby is excellent - but it distorts reality as does every effective lobby and 2. Reps and Senators rely on airlines for their travel and have to face these folks weekly

        Airlines don’t deserve a special bailout, let alone a second one. Airline employees have been through the ringer - no doubt about it and I want to clear I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, the bailout just needs to also help other industries and businesses in conjunction with airlines.

        Have to agree. It hurts to see anyone lose their job, but propping up an industry that has been making billions in past years I can’t stand behind. It’s got to be survival of the fittest.


        It doesn't make sense. I mean how can airlines get all these bailouts yet companies that RELY on air travelers for a huge chunk of business, like Enterprise/National/Alamo (EHI family) didn't (COULDN'T) get one penny to help them? EHI had to furlough and layoff thousands in April, my wife was one of them, even though she is back. I understand air travel is important but it all boils down to politics which sucks. I feel bad for ANYONE that has been impacted by COVID and as a result, are out of work. It stinks and I am sorry.


        Agreed, this is just a handout.

        Airlines are a volatile business. All seasoned airline employees and pilots know this. All the major stakeholders know this. It is inappropriate to bail them out. These are greedy corporations. Nothing more. I like capitalism and have been an airline management employee.
         
        MohawkWeekend
        Posts: 493
        Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

        Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

        Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:25 am

        I bet the Germans don't pay their airline C-Suite like the US airlines do. I might support a CARES package that helps all Americans who have been impacted by COVID (Including the clerk's working the car rental counter and at the local Marriott). But it shouldn't be tailored to support the employees of just one big industry while the rest get $300 more in unemployment benefits.
          300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
           
          Boof02671
          Posts: 2492
          Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:00 am

          They actually aren’t debating as there is no bill on the floor. Mnuchin and Pelosi along with the bipartisan sponsor are doing the talks.
           
          Boof02671
          Posts: 2492
          Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:03 am

          And the airlines aren’t special, restaurants, hotels, venues and most service industries have been devastated and there is no bailout for them.
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 3074
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:45 pm

          Sokes wrote:
          MIflyer12 wrote:
          Sokes wrote:
          Since government placed restrictions, should government be responsible for fixed costs of those industries that face said restrictions?


          No. U.S. businesses don't have a right to exist/right to profit irrespective of health demands (or sanctions on Cuba/Iran, or state of war..) There's a hundred years of law on that.

          If there is war, I'm still allowed to fly.

          Sanctions on Cuba are more tricky. A company whose business depends only on Cuba will get bankrupt. Any compensation isn't practical. Every company who has a little business with Cuba will pose demands. What about a supplier to such a company?

          You think it would be o.k. if the government tomorrow prohibits the sale of cars for one year without compensating car manufacturers?

          Can the government prohibit the sale of cars for one year, but at the same time demand labour protection?

          What about coal power plants? A sudden CO2 tax may bankrupt such plants. I'm in favour of renewables and also in favour of a CO2 tax. But I believe investment security demands that the government has to compensate the book value. So if a coal plant is let's say 300 million $ and it's depreciated over 30 years, a 10 year old plant which closes down because of CO2 tax should get 200 million $ compensation.
          Otherwise politics should give a warning. If the law says such plants are to be depreciated over 30 years, 30 years warning time is required.
          So I believe compensation is the way to go.

          In Germany some years back we had following situation, which has changed still then:
          For midday peaks gas turbines were built. However solar cells provided for a high percentage of these peaks. Also wind turbines were added. Renewables get preference. Other power suppliers have to adjust. Germany has lot of old lignite plants which can't be adjusted. So only hard coal or gas could adjust. In consequence there were some gas turbines which ran only a few hours per year. They made losses and owners wanted to shut them down. Politics didn't allow, arguing they are critical for power security. But at the same time politics didn't think it necessary that owners get compensated for this insurance service for several years. I find this outrageous.

          Yes, business includes risk including black swans. But changing government regulation shouldn't be such a risk.
          Developing countries have a lot of investment risk concerning changing government regulation. I don't want to go that way.

          If bars and restaurants aren't allowed to open, same applies to them. Rent and salaries are to be paid by government.

          You're talking as if the government has an infinite stash of money somewhere. In case you didn't know, most of the government money comes from taxes, and economy plunged quite a bit. The general assumption behind the strict measures is that it would be worse otherwise.
          Airlines certainly need support to survive for their critical role - but that is only part of the story. I don't see beach traffic or Disneyland traffic as part of that critical role. And business travel is likely , as many people say, to reduce travel by a lot with online meetings becoming the default option.
          So I don't see the failure of some (not all) airlines, and maybe part of US3 as a huge infrastructural problem. Of course, it will suck for employers - but it's not that employers in other fields didn't suffer. Remember, -33% GDP in Q2. And the worst may be still to come, both in terms of infection and in terms of economy.
           
          airtran737
          Posts: 3495
          Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:59 pm

          Waste of taxpayer money. PSP forces the airlines to bring these people back from furlough which just causes the daily losses to mount. Furloughs suck, but it is not up to the taxpayer to bailout the airlines.
          Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
           
          Sokes
          Posts: 2731
          Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 4:41 pm

          kalvado wrote:
          You're talking as if the government has an infinite stash of money somewhere. In case you didn't know, most of the government money comes from taxes, and economy plunged quite a bit.

          In case of the US:
          Ask the Chinese to lend you little more.

          That apart it's not true. There is no more gold standard. Quantitative easing is the infinite stash of money somewhere.

          I remember how government argued that this and that can't be afforded. Then came a war and suddenly money was available.

          I am normally a monetarist and believe in high interest rates. Now is the time Keynes applies.

          Assuming you are right and the government can't afford:
          It's not the government's task to decide random which industries to help and which not to help. There have to be rules equal to all, e.g. salaries are paid for the steward as well as the waiter.

          Arbitrary decisions is what developing countries do.
          The rule of law, equal to all, is what developed countries do.
          Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 3074
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 4:47 pm

          Sokes wrote:
          kalvado wrote:
          You're talking as if the government has an infinite stash of money somewhere. In case you didn't know, most of the government money comes from taxes, and economy plunged quite a bit.

          In case of the US:
          Ask the Chinese to lend you little more.

          That apart it's not true. There is no more gold standard. Quantitative easing is the infinite stash of money somewhere.

          I remember how government argued that this and that can't be afforded. Then came a war and suddenly money was available.

          I am normally a monetarist and believe in high interest rates. Now is the time Keynes applies.

          Assuming you are right and the government can't afford:
          It's not the government's task to decide random which industries to help and which not to help. There have to be rules equal to all, e.g. salaries are paid for the steward as well as the waiter.

          Arbitrary decisions is what developing countries do.
          The rule of law, equal to all, is what developed countries do.

          We may still see the fallout from the current emission..
          And it IS the government's job to decide which industries to help and which not to help, like or not - although that shouldn't be at random. There are definitely more important businesses and less important ones from a global perspective.
           
          Sokes
          Posts: 2731
          Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:00 pm

          kalvado wrote:
          We may still see the fallout from the current emission..
          And it IS the government's job to decide which industries to help and which not to help, like or not - although that shouldn't be at random. There are definitely more important businesses and less important ones from a global perspective.

          Since politicians fly a lot, aviation should be among the important ones.

          If the decision which industries to help shouldn't be random, what criterias do you suggest?

          Should critical industries in exchange for guaranteed government help have increased equity requirements?
          Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 3074
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:09 pm

          Sokes wrote:
          kalvado wrote:
          We may still see the fallout from the current emission..
          And it IS the government's job to decide which industries to help and which not to help, like or not - although that shouldn't be at random. There are definitely more important businesses and less important ones from a global perspective.

          Since politicians fly a lot, aviation should be among the important ones.

          If the decision which industries to help shouldn't be random, what criterias do you suggest?

          Should critical industries in exchange for guaranteed government help have increased equity requirements?

          It's always a tough call; but for example, choosing between hospitals and bars - I think the choice is fairly obvious.
          Aviation, I assume, should be on the more important side due to infrastructure importance (same as trucking and highways, for example) and because of certain groups of highly qualified professionals (pilots, mechanics, dispatchers) who would be hard to replace due to training and certification requirements.
          After all, the big goal is to have the world return to more or less normal in a few years, and a world without bars and theme parks is much closer to normal than one without dentists and airlines.
           
          Sokes
          Posts: 2731
          Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:32 pm

          kalvado wrote:
          Sokes wrote:
          ...
          If the decision which industries to help shouldn't be random, what criterias do you suggest?

          Should critical industries in exchange for guaranteed government help have increased equity requirements?

          It's always a tough call; but for example, choosing between hospitals and bars - I think the choice is fairly obvious.
          Aviation, I assume, should be on the more important side due to infrastructure importance (same as trucking and highways, for example) and because of certain groups of highly qualified professionals (pilots, mechanics, dispatchers) who would be hard to replace due to training and certification requirements.
          After all, the big goal is to have the world return to more or less normal in a few years, and a world without bars and theme parks is much closer to normal than one without dentists and airlines.

          If airlines go bankrupt the pilots don't disappear. They may indeed require sim time after loosing certification, but it's not a question of years.
          Probably in case of bankruptcy a new owner would inject capital.

          Your argument has another problem:
          If airlines aren't allowed to go bust, why should employees put any restrictions on salary demands?

          What do you want to charge critical industries for the government insurance? What about equity requirements?

          I agree bars are easier to restart than airlines. But I believe a lot of people would disagree that airlines are more important than bars.

          Overnight buses are not a bad way to travel. How do you make sure that your help doesn't interfere with free competition between different modes of transport?

          Even if there is no governmental help I assume there will always be somebody who offers transcontinental flights/ flights where there is no reasonable alternative.

          What about investment security?
          Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 3074
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:38 pm

          Sokes wrote:
          kalvado wrote:
          Sokes wrote:
          ...
          If the decision which industries to help shouldn't be random, what criterias do you suggest?

          Should critical industries in exchange for guaranteed government help have increased equity requirements?

          It's always a tough call; but for example, choosing between hospitals and bars - I think the choice is fairly obvious.
          Aviation, I assume, should be on the more important side due to infrastructure importance (same as trucking and highways, for example) and because of certain groups of highly qualified professionals (pilots, mechanics, dispatchers) who would be hard to replace due to training and certification requirements.
          After all, the big goal is to have the world return to more or less normal in a few years, and a world without bars and theme parks is much closer to normal than one without dentists and airlines.

          If airlines go bankrupt the pilots don't disappear. They may indeed require sim time after loosing certification, but it's not a question of years.
          Probably in case of bankruptcy a new owner would inject capital.

          Your argument has another problem:
          If airlines aren't allowed to go bust, why should employees put any restrictions on salary demands?

          What do you want to charge critical industries for the government insurance? What about equity requirements?

          I agree bars are easier to restart than airlines. But I believe a lot of people would disagree that airlines are more important than bars.

          Overnight buses are not a bad way to travel. How do you make sure that your help doesn't interfere with free competition between different modes of transport?

          Even if there is no governmental help I assume there will always be somebody who offers transcontinental flights/ flights where there is no reasonable alternative.

          What about investment security?

          I am not saying things are simple; what I am saying - there are some reasons to keep airlines afloat. Pilots may be easy to re-train; however, those who settle into a different job may just refuse to come back. Which may or may not be a problem with anticipated lower travel demand, though.
          Saying that things are done less than ideal.. For me, 2020 is not the year of the rat, but rather a worldwide year of a headless chicken.
           
          User avatar
          par13del
          Posts: 10668
          Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 6:40 pm

          Sokes wrote:
          Arbitrary decisions is what developing countries do.
          The rule of law, equal to all, is what developed countries do.

          Really, you sure you do not want to flip them?
          The developed countries and their airlines spread this virus like wild fire, and the developed countries and their big pharma and getting a vaccine out in short order.
          If we just focus on the rule of law its usually money talks, but the law is available to all.
           
          777Mech
          Posts: 1162
          Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 6:55 pm

          MohawkWeekend wrote:
          I bet the Germans don't pay their airline C-Suite like the US airlines do. I might support a CARES package that helps all Americans who have been impacted by COVID (Including the clerk's working the car rental counter and at the local Marriott). But it shouldn't be tailored to support the employees of just one big industry while the rest get $300 more in unemployment benefits.


          Well the funny thing is, in terms of salary LH's Spohr made almost $1.7M in 2018.

          DL's Ed Bastion made a measly $950,000.
           
          FromCDGtoSYD
          Posts: 433
          Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:29 am

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 7:27 pm

          Loans in exchange for equity. Give the airlines X years to pay back the loans or until exiting means recovering the initial amount + interest. Force the airlinrs to outperform once things recover. The gov gets the credit for the bailout and everybody is happy.
           
          MohawkWeekend
          Posts: 493
          Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

          Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

          Sun Dec 13, 2020 8:51 pm

          777Mech wrote:
          MohawkWeekend wrote:
          I bet the Germans don't pay their airline C-Suite like the US airlines do. I might support a CARES package that helps all Americans who have been impacted by COVID (Including the clerk's working the car rental counter and at the local Marriott). But it shouldn't be tailored to support the employees of just one big industry while the rest get $300 more in unemployment benefits.


          Well the funny thing is, in terms of salary LH's Spohr made almost $1.7M in 2018.

          DL's Ed Bastion made a measly $950,000.



          From the Atlanta Journal - "
          In an annual filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday, Delta disclosed that Bastian got a base salary increase from $900,000 to $950,000 effective Feb. 1, 2019, and he got stocks, options and incentives valued earlier at $16 million.

          So a total compensation of around $17 million. I bet there are 20 people at Delta who make more (total compensation) then the CEO of Lufthansa. It's like that at just about every large US company.
            300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
             
            MohawkWeekend
            Posts: 493
            Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

            Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

            Sun Dec 13, 2020 9:04 pm

            I don't mean to pile on because I appreciate every one's opinions. Found this the website Salary.com with a simple search of Delta Airlines Sr. Executive Salaries from SEC filings in 2019 -

            Name And Title Total Compensation

            Edward H. Bastian Chief Executive Officer $17,291,985
            Glen W. Hauenstein President $9,917,833
            Paul A. Jacobson Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer $6,253,825
            W. Gil West Senior Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer $9,886,717
            Peter W. Carter Executive Vice President & Chief Legal Officer $5,037,459
              300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
               
              Sokes
              Posts: 2731
              Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

              Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

              Sun Dec 13, 2020 11:45 pm

              par13del wrote:
              Sokes wrote:
              Arbitrary decisions is what developing countries do.
              The rule of law, equal to all, is what developed countries do.

              Really, you sure you do not want to flip them?
              The developed countries and their airlines spread this virus like wild fire, and the developed countries and their big pharma and getting a vaccine out in short order.
              If we just focus on the rule of law its usually money talks, but the law is available to all.

              I don't understand. Can you expand?
              Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
               
              Boof02671
              Posts: 2492
              Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

              Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

              Mon Dec 14, 2020 12:35 am

              777Mech wrote:
              MohawkWeekend wrote:
              I bet the Germans don't pay their airline C-Suite like the US airlines do. I might support a CARES package that helps all Americans who have been impacted by COVID (Including the clerk's working the car rental counter and at the local Marriott). But it shouldn't be tailored to support the employees of just one big industry while the rest get $300 more in unemployment benefits.


              Well the funny thing is, in terms of salary LH's Spohr made almost $1.7M in 2018.

              DL's Ed Bastion made a measly $950,000.

              That was his salary he also was granted $13.2 million in stock.
               
              MSJYOP28Apilot
              Posts: 459
              Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

              Re: Senate Again Debating CARES2 for Airlines and Airports

              Mon Dec 14, 2020 7:50 am

              The issue every airline is facing right now whether they furloughed, are planning to furlough, or worked out a deal to avoid furloughs is that presently there is simply not enough work for everyone. The hope is that by summer 2021 airlines are all going to fly around 80-90% of the pre-pandemic schedule and thus the jobs saved now by either government funding or union deals will only result in a short term situation of workers getting paid to sit and home and do nothing.

              The issue is what happens if the summer 2021 is only 60-70% or less of pre-pandemic flying? Then you have the issue of how long do you keep propping up jobs that are simply not needed. Long term it is not efficient to be paying large numbers of workers their full wages to sit at home.

              Popular Searches On Airliners.net

              Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

              Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

              Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

              Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

              Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

              Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

              Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

              Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

              Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

              Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

              Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

              Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

              Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

              Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

              Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos