sailingfun

Delta furloughed after 911. The company claimed FM and won. In 2003 the company attempted to furlough more pilots and the same claims were made. This time we won as the furloughs were ruled economic in nature and the furloughs were canceled. In addition the arbitrator required the company to start recalling already furloughed pilots based on passenger counts.
In 2009 the country was in the Great Recession and we ended up with about 900 surplus pilots for several years. There were no furloughs as the contract had several layers of economic penalties if the company put even 1 pilot on the street. The company did not want to pay the price tag.

hookshot123

2558

Shock and Awe. No way it is that big.

FangsF15

So 2313 UNA is now 2558, which is the exact number they can furlough before removing 6 seats from the 76-seat DCI airplanes. Shocker.

If anyone doubted the MOAD was part of a grand strategic plan from the start to both force folks to take an early out, as well as show everyone how bad the displacements will be in the hopes we will take concessions as a result.... All doubt has been removed. Remember, management did not hesitate to induce massive stress on both the UNA and the over 5,000 pilots displaced to lower paying categories. Just to prove a point, and to dangle some small hope that it can mostly be undone.

Does that sound like a management team that views us as partners???

Call their bluff.

WhiskeyDelta

Close, 2564 based on the June list. Still too close to not discard the coincidence.

Gone Flying

2313 does not include any pilots on MIL, PLA, and SIC leaves. I think that is the difference

DWC CAP10 USAF

I think the difference between the 2313 UNA’s and the 2558 is folks that were in the bottom 2500 of seniors list but out on LTD, MLOA, etc, at the time of the AE, their names don’t show awarded UNA on the award list.

Edit: Gone Flying is a faster typer.

jaxsurf

No concessions, period.

Also, I hope we help the FAs organize.

Gone Flying

Help me out with this, Delta has XX hours to divide among their pilots. if we keep the current ALV with no EOs they figure they are overstaffed by 2558. It would seem they do not seem to care how we divide the hours, but those are the hours they have to work with. Whether we choose to keep 72 or change to a lower number based on how many EOs, it seems this is a case of simple division of hours by pilots. If they were trying to extract scope concessions or raise our healthcare premiums I could see the FUD argument but this seems to directly correlate. Whether or not the pilot group chooses 1 way or another is up to the members.

seriously help me understand if you disagree, I'm open to learning

Tailhookah

I got furloughed from North while covered under a no furlough clause and never got a cent of contractual furlough pay... yeah that was a worthless agreement. Don’t fall for it again.

Bucking Bar

You are exactly correct, although the math probably isn't that unfavorable given that the overstaffing # is about 2,300 active pilots.

Management will explain "the best paid pilots in the world didn't want to share to keep their union brothers on the property" and make this MEC own it. This will create a division between our older pilots and the younger pilots which will make it more difficult to come together and direct C19 successfully. It will also reduce the pressure we all bring to bear on scope enforcement since a number of our list will not have a vote and the senior pilots have already spoken.

Yeah, I know that is a deeply unpopular view, but frankly, we have a chance to be noble here and we should be unified to protect jobs when given an opportunity to do so. This positions the company for a better recovery and provides opportunities to grow and fly above the ALV, or go spend some concern-free time with those (or what) we love.

Your money doesn't love you back.

You think management is wrong? Prove it. Put your money where your mouth is. When the market recovers pick up all and everything, plus Green Slips.