Originally Posted by Sliceback

Typical furlough math (everything in life has exceptions) - not furloughs unless it's 5%. Bad furloughs are 15%. 9/11 was up to 20% but a couple of ALPA carriers hit 25%.

Will a bigger airline have larger numbers? Of course. 100 pilots and 10 get furloughed? People yawn...but it's 10% of the airline. Airline with 10,000 pilots furloughs 500? National news...but it's only 5%.

Used to be, due to training costs associated with retraining across fleets, that furloughs less than a year typically didn't happen and 2 years was a more common cutoff. Rebound expected in 12, 18, or 24 months? The company wouldn't furlough.

Retirements are part of the math. AA as an example - 14,500 (?) line pilots. 800 (?) in the next 2 years? That's 5.5% a year. Stop hiring and it's the same as furloughing 5.5%. Two years of retirements is 11% reduction in the pilot corps. So if you get 5-10% below you and add in the up coming retirements you're probably safe from a furlough.

Rule of thumb (ignoring the impact of retirements) - 5% is the first furlough risk mitigation number. 15% is furlough protection absent a Black Swan event, Nothing can protect you from furlough if you went to a weak airline in the first place.

I'd focus on the percentages of any announced furloughs. It's the same with 'large' aircraft orders - what's the percentage? Large hiring numbers? What's the percentage?

This is mostly related to economic cycles. The Max delivery delay or the PW engines issues are a whole different issue.