Originally Posted by
siemprerojo
From the crew lounge yesterday in SLC:
Keeping DC-9's till end of 2013
Next AE, first week of March, DC-9's and MD-90 will be funded by 777, 747 and Domestic 767.
We are over by 200 pilots summer 2012.
Wow didn't know that 50% of this base "chooses"
to commute.
Hiring to start 2013 and to go indefinitely. The presenter is in charge of hiring and is worried about getting enough pilots in the pipeline in order to not over tax the simulator availability. He is concerned about keeping up the quality of pilots.
They would rather hire to fill the DC-9 and MD-90 this year but Richard won't go for it.
Commentary: In general, we are doing everything to reduce our debt and improve our product (lie flat seats). I am happy about that as I'd rather work for a profitable company than one losing money. But I am banking on my union to help my career and my wife's career along (scope, JV, etc.). Understandably the company is worried about making a profit and not too worried about our stagnation. I'm looking to my union to get our flying back and I've written to my reps and negotiators in that regard.
Thanks for the update! Are the training events generated by these widebody displacements seriously less expensive than paying a guy first year pay on the 88/90/DC9 now? I would guess with healthcare and retirement that a new hire costs the company 60-80k the first year. 747-330-764-7ER-73N-M88-DC9 would be six training events. Do we qual a guy on a new jet for less than $10k?
And I'm only coming at this from the economic standpoint of the Company. I'm not even considering the "respect" and "constructive engagement" they are giving up by turning life upside down for six of their "highly valued" pilots and their families. I don't see how it's worth holding off hiring for one year. (Unless that hiring is an empty promise, which I've come to expect).