900
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
#73
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 300
Likes: 4
From: B787 FO
#75
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
10/29/2017 - 12/31/2017 201
01/01/2018 - 12/31/2018 528
01/01/2019 - 12/31/2019 637
01/01/2020 - 12/31/2020 772
01/01/2021 - 12/31/2021 838
01/01/2022 - 12/31/2022 861
01/01/2023 - 12/31/2023 957
Retirements at age 65 so 900 doesn't seem out of line to stay ahead of attrition. (and early retirements of course!)
01/01/2018 - 12/31/2018 528
01/01/2019 - 12/31/2019 637
01/01/2020 - 12/31/2020 772
01/01/2021 - 12/31/2021 838
01/01/2022 - 12/31/2022 861
01/01/2023 - 12/31/2023 957
Retirements at age 65 so 900 doesn't seem out of line to stay ahead of attrition. (and early retirements of course!)
#76
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,417
Likes: 120
From: Window seat
The company's estimate for 2017 retirements looked like they were using know retirements and adding 15%. That's close to the historical average I tracked years ago. That would indicate perhaps 607 retirements next year.
Using the recent actually retirements with 10% coming from guys averaging 60 yrs old would indicate perhaps 627 reitementes next year. 528 + 10% of 2023's.
Two assumptions = 617 +/- 10.
Hiring nine hundred next year would result in apaprox a two percent increase in manning which is approx the same percentage as the long term expected growth in the industry. So nothing unexpected in those percentages.
Using the recent actually retirements with 10% coming from guys averaging 60 yrs old would indicate perhaps 627 reitementes next year. 528 + 10% of 2023's.
Two assumptions = 617 +/- 10.
Hiring nine hundred next year would result in apaprox a two percent increase in manning which is approx the same percentage as the long term expected growth in the industry. So nothing unexpected in those percentages.
#78
On Reserve
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 137
Likes: 3
#79
Unless of course you're referring to the E190.
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,417
Likes: 120
From: Window seat
The seniority list/DOH gets scrambled because there's a bunch of 2013's mixed with 1999 DOH's, then groups of 2013 DOH's, and alternating 1999 and 2013's, then fewer 2013's mixed with 2001 DOH's. It doesn't become pure 2013 DOH's until 12450 ish.
Current junior CA DOH, non AWA, is 3/2001. 10,8xx of 15,xxx. On property is 10,679 of 14,542 (73%). Junior CA percentage used to be 60-65%. Then it dropped closer to 70%. Now it's 73%. That's because the G4 FO job pays the same (FO line holder vs CA rsv) and gives you better relative seniority. So the junior CA is 3,863 numbers senior to the junior guy on the list. That's under five years to upgrade assuming typical retirement patterns.
Last edited by Sliceback; 11-01-2017 at 07:47 PM. Reason: upgrade time
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



