Originally Posted by acl65pilot

As I have said, most of the RJ flying terminates by 2020, and Pinnacle's new contract in 2022. Go look on the 10K. The number of RJ's gets paired down quite quickly in the latter half of the decade. To solve the issue, we just need to hold firm at a min, with a commitment from the company to not write new agreements, or modify or extend the existing ones. That alone solves the issue. These current RJ's are going to be obsolete when the new gen stuff like the C-Series arrives. The CASM on these RJ's will kill em.

Originally Posted by 1234

North Dakota!!!!!!!

You were talking about the NCAA Hockey Tourney, weren't you.

Originally Posted by gloopy

A commitment as in a CEO/VP handshake whilst sipping brandy and backslapping in a golf cart at a country club, or a commitment as in put it in the CBA with strong language and no FM clause?

Even the UCAL guy's opener is what you describe. No one is suggesting that the company will agree to park 250+ large dual class RJ's by noon tomorrow, plus give us 65% raises in one year, plus free health care, plus reinstitute a fully funded non defaultable A plan, plus all the work rules we deserve plus all those that an aviating jailhouse lawyer can dream up.

However to get a glimpse at how hard it will be to get them to agree to do what you've described (and then to much less actually do it) we need look no further than the very agressive act of signing on fresh large dual class right under our noses, very very recently. They have no intention of ever reducing their outsourcing fantasy without the pilot group "paying for it" in their minds. I hope I'm wrong.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

I know how difficult it will be, but I am all for it. Their is economic incentive as well. Frankly, we do not really need to do the clause, we just need to hold the line on scope. The clause is insurance against a next gen 50+ seat jets. (btw, language in the CBA)

I hate those RJ's coming and the 9's leaving as much as the next guy, but they are allowed by us, and DAL is only exercising their rights. My response is, lets learn from it.

Originally Posted by capncrunch

Apparently it's still hot in the kitchen. My pictures are not distracting enough. Try this....

Originally Posted by Columbia

Thanks for the input, ACL. Using both current nag LGB pay systems, where would you currently be paid and what would you QOL had the hiring stopped a month after you were hired? I guess what I'm trying to understand is if QOL and pay are affected by where one was hired in a cycle of either massive growth or stagnation, I.E. Possibly getting stuck at the bottom of the list for years (amr, ual, us). Thanks again.

Originally Posted by Sink r8

OK, so you're debating this? I'm not sure if you're trying to make my point, or yours.

It's a lot more economical to furlough when the bottom of each category contains the junior pilot, than in an airline that's perfectly stovepiped. If you need to cut overall flying 20% (i.e. after 9/11), and you look at the 20% junior pilots, you find that (oops), that's 100% of you maddog F/O's, and 50% of your A320 F/O's. Now what? Well, you have to displace. The 88 F/O's "displace" to the street. The A320 guys to the 88, etc. Until enough displacements have occured, you can't operate the 80% of the 88 flying you still wish to perform, and you don't have enough for the A320 either. So you weigh this carefully. You look at the entire list, and ou calculate the cost of displacing 20% of the entire system, from the top fleet on down, and you have a powerful dissincentive to pull the trigger if you won't have enough time on furlough to recoup your costs.

This is why we didn't furlough in 2008: it wasn't worth it.

If you have a system that isn't stovepiped at all, all F/O's distributed somewhat evenly, depending on where they live, the flying they like, etc. The junior 20% of all pilots makes up about 40% of all F/O categories (I'm assuming we have the same number of A's and B's). Now, you don't need to wait until you have to retrain 80% of your 88 F/O's (the total flying you were performing, minus the 20% you don't want). You only need to train 20% of your 88 B's (40% of the guys getting furloughed, minus 20% cut in flying). The great news? You're displacing 20% of the Captains, too. And, better yet, 20% of your 88 Captains are already trained. Since you're in a LBP situation, chances are they're flying the 88 because they like it, so the geography and the flying already floats their boat. And since they won't make more money by displacing to a senior WB category (LBP for all, remember?), then they might as well stay as 88 B's. What's the downside?

So, under our existing rules, it takes months to get everyone on the street, and the replacements trained. Under a LBP sytem, the entire airline is potentially set up properly to chop off the bottom X % of any and all categories, no questions asked. Send the certified letters, and it's done!

So to answer you hypothetical about the 737 guy and the A320 guy, the answer is that the 737 under a LBP sytem wouldn't be senior or junior to the A320 guy, and since it's easy to chop off 20% of either category, he'd stay put. One less training event. One less cost to be factored in against a furlough.

This is the stuff that would have made Kolshack cream his pants. And Burns too, whatever she has in her pants.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

I am more worried about the rest of my career than what I can hold today. If we were totally stovepiped I would be on the 73N as a line holder.

Also, bid my current seat as a line holder, held nice four leg four day trips and then started moving backwards a few years ago. Not complaining but just pointing that out. My reason for where I am not is, I do not want to commit to a two year seat lock that may limit my options when more seats move. It has nothing to do with QOL. I made the decision to take a QOL hit to avoid another seat lock. Currently I do not get anything I bid for due to where I sit on the jet. Once the music stops, I will then bid off.

Yes, I am junior but have well over 10% of the total list below me.

Originally Posted by gloopy

I hope that we learn from it as well. And I'm not sure what irks me more...us funding the most powerful and best funded startup ultra LCC in human history of the future (SKYW) or us funding a Lorenzo style "Air Group" (RAH/F9) right now. Both are strong evidence, IMO, that our current leadership team either doesn't care because they know they won't be here that long, or worse, they don't understand where the money is going in the first place. I doubt its the second one.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Where is Ferd and Carl? Are they over there?