Originally Posted by
Roadkill
Thx for the reply. I really don't lump all the problems into one and blame the TA, though it's understandable to assume that from my positions and tone. I merely maintain that certain productivity increases we gave the company in the TA will have more effect on allowing the company to delay hiring that is being promulgated. My career progression prior to 2013 had nothing to do with the TA of course. None of the other items you list have any relationship to the TA productivity gains I'm concerned with, nor do I mistake their effects for those I calculate from the TA areas I'm discussing. And I simply don't believe some of your numerical summarization is correct or accurate, much is inferred based on YOUR beliefs on what is causal.
Anyways, we're both hoping for the same things and just arguing about angels on the head of a pin while we wait for those hopes to materialize. Without full access to both of us of all the data crew resources has, it's just two blind guys arguing about the heat they feel on their skin for half the day. You say it's a fire carried on a giant tortoises back as he walks across the horizon each day; I say its a giant ball of flame towed behind Apollo's chariot as he traverses the heavens. Neither of us is close to astro-mechanics of stars.
Of course, I'm much much closer in my guess than you are

The problem with blaming the TA is facts get in the way. Categories properly manned with stable block hours have seen no change in manning. Crew planning has made no changes with their manning assumptions with the TA. 767ERA is a excellent example. Plus a couple of positions overall in a category that should have if you believe the forum have had a massive loss of jobs. 73NA is another example. Plus 80 captains with more captains postings planned as the year progresses. This is a category adding about 10 airframes in the next year. If you believe this TA was a massive job loss how do you explain the numbers?