Once NWA switches to 1 for 3.5 you will no longer see many if any domestic 5 day trips. It becomes almost impossible for the company to avoid credit time when the trip exceeds 4 days. A typical 3 day trip actually is usually 48 to 50 hours TAFB. A 4 day trip is 72 to 74. A 5 day trip is 94 to 96 hours TAFB or almost double a 3 day trip so the credit really starts to kick in.

We had alot of 5 day trips on the 9 back before 9/11 when our rig was 1:3.5. They always went very senior because of the numbers of commuters.

So, do you think something that gets added into this furlough ROI matrix is the fear that they furlough and then senior FNWA retire quicker than planned thus negating the cost benefit of the furlough as you would have to bring pilots back sooner than desired?

Plus what about fuel prices finally getting lower by spring or summer?

I'd be surprised if they offer an early out on the FNWA side of things. We will be short before we will be over. Its the DAL side that has the "weight" issue, at least for now. Lets hope that the economy stabilizes and neither side get to heavy! We'll see

I agree Super, and its probably a "moo" point to wonder why they haven't furloughed because, well, they just haven't. Period. And if the bookings don't pick up they probably will.

I was just wondering how retirements might play into DAL's furlough thinking. It'd be one thing if DAL's side of the fence had the most senior pilots, but its the side thin on staffing with the most senior pilots.

This is what I'm thinking, we could still have a further SMALL fleet reduction and still not see furloughs pre SOC but at SOC we see furloughs without the economy getting any worse or any more fleet reductions.

I think this because right now I am hearing DAL is planning on surpluses at SOC despite NWA coming in "short". Could be bad sources though. And while they want to offer packages (to off load senior senior pilots) right now they obviously can't, the prime candidates are FNWA. So they have to wait to SOC to see what their staffing is, if its slightly over then see if packages can take care of it.

But why I think they won't furlough with a fleet reduction pre SOC is because it'd be on the DAL side to correct our supluses but what if at SOC you get a bunch of FNWA pilots retiring unexpectedly, then you are short on that side and you have to recall which would probably be before you hit your ROFI (return on furlough investment which we've heard is about 2 years). You're better off waiting till one list, offering packages, calculating and then reacting to your needs at that time than you are to furloughing now.

So, they wait.

And its hard to type when you're bouncing a newborn in your arms.

You have a fairly good grasp of what the issues are surrounding this issue.

I think another variable to consider is that furloughing prior to SOC could result in great headaches. If you downsize the MD88 flying for instance, you would furlough DAL pilots. Upon SOC, lets say some of those pilots are senior to FNWA guys. They would need to recall the furloughees and then furlough the NWA guys. You are in essence robbing Peter to pay Paul. By waiting until the SOC you will have a much better picture as to what, if any, retirements will take place and also a furlough will be strictly DOH for the combined list. Much easier to figure out when you have the Compass flow through to deal with.

yes, but you do not have to recall FDL or FNWA guys that were furloughed prior to SOC until there is a need. Even if it is out of order.

My understanding is that is how it is legally looked at.

That could be a real saving grace to some who might otherwise be getting the door. It will be very interesting to see how this is played out.

That it will. It is part but not all of the reason that even though we are overstaffed we have not done anything about it.
One of the other aspects is that we will have a lot of training that will need to be done in the next two to three years.