Originally Posted by MrBogardi

Should it be any other way? A Captain displaced out of base X should get priority over a Captain spots in base Y even if a Senior pilot is an FO in base Y and decides they want that CA spot? How would that be fair?

Originally Posted by ShyGuy

It’s seniority. Vacancies are awarded first. So that more senior FO would get the position in base Y as Capt. Then as for Capt in base X, it depends if enough CAs above him bid out and satisfied all reduction requirements. If not, as long as he bid his own base X as Capt bid #1 and now can’t hold it, he gets to displace into base Y at his current seniority, and knock out the bottom most Capt at base Y who will then be displaced somewhere else.


vacancies awarded first. If enough Captains voluntarily bid out of the base that is being reduced, it fulfills a reduction requirement and spot isn’t backfilled.



And I’m pretty sure the following is correct…

You could even have Capt awards INTO a base being reduced. Say LA publishes 30 CA reductions. But 35 senior LA Captains voluntarily bid out to SAN and SEA. This example would satisfy all 30 reductions and have 5 proffer positions into LAX CA.

Originally Posted by ShyGuy

Only the very bottom 13 SFO CA are most junior. #14 as of the May bid award, could displace into SEA CA and kick the bottom guy out there.

SAN will probably trend senior, and plenty of SFO and LAX guys will bid it. Could turn out there aren’t any reduction awards processed because enough CAs bid out SAN as their #1 choice and fulfilled a reduction requirement in SFO/LAX.

Originally Posted by PineappleXpres

I thought the SEA CA would have to be reduced to cause that.

Originally Posted by Jetlikespeed

I know many of you have been waiting a long time for this day. I’d also share that many people have worked very hard and very long to get this across the finish line. See below for stats / facts in regard to what this means and a few thoughts on the future.

• This bid will open a SAN 737 base with approx. ~80 CAs & 70 FOs
• Another bid will follow in late spring with approx ~60 CA & 40 FO vacancies
• Bid#2 will have a bid effective date likely in early October ’26
• These two bids will right-size (shrink) both LAX & SFO by approx ~20-25% each
• We will likely right-size LAX & SFO at roughly the same rate in these two bids – meaning – approx half of the reduction in each base will occur on each of the two bids

Additionally:

• We still plan to hire ~90 new FOs in Q1 ’26
• There will likely be an additional 20-30 captain upgrades in Q1 for growth
• These additional ‘growth’ CA vacancies will likely be sprinkled across the system (TBD)

On SFO & LAX, we need to reduce both to fund the SAN flying as its projected. LAX, and to a much larger degree SFO, have been too large and needed to be right-sized for a long time. In SFO in particular, we’ve been forcing flying to the SFO base for 3+ years that would have naturally anchored elsewhere. This is both very expensive and operationally difficult. The reality is, between LAX & SFO there are more pilots that already live closer to SAN than we’d need to fund the entire base.

Given our growth trajectory in SAN, it has become advantageous both operationally and economically to establish a pilot base with a reserve pilot force there. It is imperative that this base cover operational needs as efficiently as possible for it to succeed. In other words, the SAN base must perform extremely well in terms of ‘Flight Ops’ cancels, delays and personal reliability or it will not be advantageous and simply will not stay open. I chose the word “advantageous” versus “necessary” very intentionally as our SAN flying can be managed from other, much larger bases, particularly in the Pacific Northwest if need be.
These changes are directly in service to our strategic priorities of being best in class operators and generating durable financial performance. Increasing revenue and profitability are critical to our future success, and each of you has a major impact on both. I recently wrote you about “back to running the business.” Along the same lines, this decision is another business decision designed to improve our operation and long-term financial stability for the entire company.
As always, my commitment is to provide you with the best information I can so that you have what you need to make decisions and plan accordingly. That’s all for today so I’ll close with ‘happy bidding’ and take care of you & yours!

Originally Posted by WarmSandDreams

Wow. It has been a while since I've worked for a leader as uninspiring as DM(and we had Ingram as a CEO). Has he always treated you all like children, or is this a new trait?

Originally Posted by ShyGuy

A displaced pilot from a forced reduction in SFO or LAX who bid his own base/seat as #1 and couldn’t hold it, as a reduction, can displace into ANY base/seat at his seniority. Even bases with 0 vacancies posted.

Originally Posted by PineappleXpres

Makes sense, but I thought there were limitations. Guess there are zero.

Originally Posted by ShyGuy

How would it work at Hawaiian in the same circumstance?

Suppose Amazon contract is terminated. And suppose they only post 787 SEA vacancies. Can the 330F senior guy not displace into 321 or 717 CA positions even if they have zero vacancies there? Using his displacement rights?

Originally Posted by Ptolem

Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but it’s my understanding that if you have displacement rights you can move into whatever seat you have the seniority to hold, full stop, regardless of rank or equipment. Worst case scenario, potentially displacing the bottom pilot of that seat and creating a cascade of displacements throughout various fleet types all the way to the bottom.