Originally Posted by
shiznit
Let's start with I don't know you so I'm not sure we're friends.
Second, let me give you the definition of "net" as applied here:
So, let's do a little lesson.
A "net" of zero means that after deductions (MEM DC9 CA in our case) there will be the same number of total captains as before the AE.
Here is the quote again from Crew Resources so you can re-read it:
There is NOT a "net zero" as you claim. There is a NET GAIN
of 42 new Captain positions being created.
Simply put, you are wrong. A net increase of 42 captain positions system wide, and ALL of them are at a pay grade greater than the DC9.
There are some real problems we are facing, this isn't one of them so take your straw man and go home.
This is a good example of how the company puts a spin on the AE process to disguise the loss of captain seats in the system. Taking such a statement at face value ignores reality. 22 D3. projected staffing shows the trend is a loss of 76 Captain seats over the next year. So you were right-partly, it's not a NET ZERO. IT'S A NET LOSS OF 76 Captain seats.
From the last 3 AE's:
Projected Capt. Positions Systemwide
Aug 2011-- 4928
Jan 2012-- 4912
Nov 2012-- 4852