That's no longer true. iCrew shows all the awards and swaps for the entire month, not just next day. For example, go back and look at the Daily Trip Coverage info on the 20th and you'll see all the awards for the following month.

This is not true anymore. That changed about 6 months ago.

Icrew shows all trip transactions. The change came several months ago.

80 total with 51 first choice ahead of low 6300s for 717A

110 first choice 6900's.

Anyone else notice the crew resources April update is back out with the "potential wide body order" phrase now deleted?

To my understanding under the daily trip coverage the codes PS and PW are swapping and white slipping for more than next day rotations. AM I not correct?

Well you've got to wonder what that was all about. Sounds to me like the board of directors had a different idea in mind...

There would be a riot around here if we merged with JB and they put their 4 and 5 year CA's ahead of the senior 9000 and higher DAL pilots. Don't forget that DAL would get rid of all their E190's like SWA did to the 717...stagnation forever!

Regarding the statement of hiring 8000 pilots in the next 10 years: My problem with that isn't training capacity or anything like that. It is the time frame involved in relation to making such a statement.

IMHO nobody in this industry, or any industry in the country for that matter, knows or can accurately predict their hiring needs that far out in the present. Too much can change, there are too many variables, too many unknowns. That you can predict hiring that far out well enough to make such the statements that they have, to me is folly.

The hiring situation couldn't even be accurately predicted roughly 6 months after a statment about hiring was made during the contract vote. But a statement for hiring up to a decade into the future is to be believed? We have been told they planned to hire around 100, but increased MLOAs returning negated that. Precisely the point. An unknown variable changed the hiring picture in as little as 6 months after the mention of possible hiring.

And I am not referring to the known age 65 retirement numbers. I am referring to variables over that long of a time that could have an effect on the need to hire for those retirements (in part or whole), or hiring for any other reasons.

Stop and take a few moments to think of all the different unkown variables that could have an effect on hiring over the next 10 years: The economy, EU breaks apart, another 9-11 type event, SARS, war, regulatory changes including a further increase to age 65, another asteroid hitting a russian town, another nuclear meltdown event in a specific region, blah blah blah. After doing so, add to it the fact that some times you just "don't know what you don't know." Black-swan type of events.

And yes, of course that number could come true. I would love for it to happen. But to me, the statements of hiring 8000 pilots in the next 10 years, or hiring "indefinitely" into the future once hiring starts, are nothing but "feel good" type statements. Statements possibly aimed at somewhat managing expectations. Always have good news. Such statements being made, in light of the inability to accurately predict that far into the future, always make me take pause and wonder: why are they making such statements? To what end?

As recent posts here have been discussing, I think the real picture of future hiring, and the potential mitigators to the retirement/hiring bubble, will become known during the next contract negotiations (and the carrots associated with it), or in new merger possibilities. Hopefully I am 100% wrong and hiring proceeds as stated.