Major Trump megadonor’s private jet company lands $27 million bailout: report

[homersapien 11,363]

Because the $27 million was a grant — and not a loan — it does not have to be repaid

 

https://www.salon.com/2020/05/15/major-trump-megadonors-private-jet-company-lands-27-million-bailout-report/

 

[homersapien 11,363]

https://www.trumpbailouts.org/

Documenting the Trump Administration’s Bailout For Big Businesses during the COVID 19 Crisis

[wdefromtx 3,159]

So a company that qualified for the grant got the grant and we are supposed to be upset with it? SMH.

As long as they don't take that money and immediately layoff everyone what is the problem?

 

As far as the other businesses, that site has a list of the airlines that took the money.....one of the industries hardest hit by the pandemic. But they are big companies so we are supposed to be upset? Good Grief. 

 

And as far as any of the small businesses having a hard time getting their money, its on the system in place that we have and all the shady deals that have gone on for years. In reality it is both sides in DC that are to blame for any mess with handing out the money. 

[I_M4_AU 7,799]

Interestingly enough, the second link from Trumpbailout shows a chart that includes Clay Lacy Aviation and under the Trump connection there is no comment.  Either Trumpbailout didn’t do their homework or Salon is trying to stir the pot.  I guess both could be true at once.  Kyle Herig from Trumpbailout even mentions Clay Lacy Aviation in the first article as a company that supported Trump, but it doesn’t show in his chart, curious.  The Trumpbailout chart shows a lot of aviation companies and most do not have a connection to Trump. Talk about cherry-picking.

As to the Salon article; what a punch of .

This was not the first time an airline came under fire over federal funding. After receiving a $5 billion bailout, the CEO of United Airlines urged workers to leave voluntarily or face layoffs and shorter hours, a move which likely violates stipulations in the CARES Act, lawmakers said.

"You may want to seriously consider if you're in a position to take a voluntary separation," he wrote. ". . . We recognize that this is painful news, but it provides what we believe is the most accurate assessment of what lies ahead for our company."United COO Greg Hart said in a leaked staff memo obtained by CNN that the company needed to "right size" its workforce.

"You may want to seriously consider if you're in a position to take a voluntary separation," he wrote. ". . . We recognize that this is painful news, but it provides what we believe is the most accurate assessment of what lies ahead for our company."

My comments:  The airline gets a fixed amount of money from this *bailout* and it has to determine the best way to survive with a 10% load factor (it usually take around 60-70% load factor to make a profit).  Employee costs are the biggest cost the airline has, so the airlines (that have been through this before) will cut their costs by reducing employees.  The highest paid employees, as a group, are the pilots.  Pilots are required by law to retire at age 65, so what the airlines are doing is offering the pilots an early retirement (in the words of the article, leave voluntarily) so the pilot group will not have to furlough as many pilots on October 1st.

I’m not sure if other employee groups are being offered an *early out*, but I guess they are.  They are asking employees to take a voluntary leave of absence of up to a year.  Both the early retirement and leave of absence come with full medical until the day you come back or retire.  So the article from Salon, which is typical, only has one side of the story and are too lazy to do any research to cover the other side; or is it the United COO mentioned this and they decided it wasn’t the narrative it wanted to push?

I doubt if violates stipulations of the CARES Act, but you never know.  I’m sure somebody will try to make the case.  The bottom line is the Airlines/Aviation companies need to do what they can to survive.