Having been displaced/re-trained 5 times...I think a couple of months enjoying Spons and the BBQ Kitchen at the Holiday Inn North on Va. Ave (instead of NATCO), training for a pay cut on a new plane, with a new base and a more junior commute will motivate a 4-Eng guy to take his frozen pension and retire more than some sort of wimpy buy-out. Especially if they can stay where they are until they turn 65, making 74A pay, dropping a few trips a year to get a head start on the ice-fishing season!?

I know only the bottom 25% will be mandatorily displaced, but if the training backlog is too great for the company to swallow, just let that category stay fat until guys bid off with a (hopefully) new WB order or the senior guys hit 65. I think the 15 SEA 330 captain vacancies on the current AE are designed to attract the bottom of the 74 list to bid off the whale before they get displaced so they can be trained over a greater period of time and avoid any bubble.

There's no need to also offer a deal to the top 25% since they're all near 63 anyway.

Jmho..

 

Couple of reasons. DALPA attempted to capture the efficiency gains from the 727 which it more or less directly replaced* and Southwest airlines actually made a convenient benchmark (and who said we could not pattern bargain off the Southwest student Council?).

We again tried to capture the efficiency gains over the 757 that the 737-900 is replacing. That was a dollar.*

*(however, considering the 737-900 needs a flaps 15 War Emergency Power takeoff to get out of a sea level airport with a 10,000 foot runway and cruises at 25,000 feet, we have discovered the 737 is less efficient than the 40 year old design it is replacing so in C2015 we are going to take a $15 an hour concession to the 757 ... but the trips are better ... the 737-900 can only go to former SAC bases ... which is why the zoomies all bid the thing ... reminds them of their youth )

 

I thought we just did it to screw the NWA guys. Oh, that's what you were saying

 

What do you think targeted early retirement is worth? What do you think we should get?

The reason I ask is, it costs something to displace and it costs something to offer an early retirement program. Do you think it costs significantly more to displace that there would be something for everyone else? I have no clue...

 

... and you think it gets rough on APC

 

Too bad you have to sacrifice pay for that choice. Just sayin'

 

Management isn't offering early outs to be nice. They would not be asking for them unless they knew the cost of displacing was greater than the cost of buyouts. Agreed?

As far as what we should get...I'm open. I do know we need to get something for everyone in return for bailing the company out of its self-imposed training catastrophe.

 

More money. For everybody. Especially the guys senior to them that are being bypassed in this. But most especially me, because bigger pays more, and I'll take a seniority hit when the golden boys bid down on us.

 

I'd say we can assume displacements are at least break even with buyouts to the company. I'd be interested to know what the gap is and if there is a surplus I'd be happy to take it.

Hypothetically, if the cost (to the company) of buyouts was exactly equal to displacements factoring in everything, would you be in favor of a deal? In other words, the 747 guys get something to leave and the rest of the pilot group gets no displacements? I'm assuming we can verify the costs. I'd guess that shouldn't be too hard to do.

 

When factoring the costs of displacing from the 744...in addition to the simple cost of each training event, we've got to factor in the potentially much higher cost of not being able to fly the schedule due to manning issues.

Some fleets are already at or near capacity even without displacements. The 717 pipeline is already maxed out. Adding more training due to displacements is impossible. Then management is looking at canceling flights. The real and intangible costs of that outcome would likely exceed the training events themselves.

DALPA has some leverage here. Will they use it, or "constructively engage" it away?