Envoy
10-24-2018, 11:41 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,523
Originally Posted by Iflythe72
I’m going on 6 months in ord 145 with no end in sight.
10-24-2018, 12:49 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Position: Resigned
Posts: 1,547
Originally Posted by rabbo
Are Envoy FOs across the fleet/bases sitting reserve for a long period of time? Some say yes, some say no but it's not always quantified. I understand "it depends." Are we talking 3 months, 6 months, 12+? What aircraft (As a 31 year old RTP it sounds like I would not have much of a choice, if my class were even offered a choice)? I would be looking at ORD or LGA.
Just looking for best guesses here as I have a couple of options available and I would prefer to not commute to reserve for half a year or more when there are other places I could hold a line much quicker.
Just looking for best guesses here as I have a couple of options available and I would prefer to not commute to reserve for half a year or more when there are other places I could hold a line much quicker.
10-24-2018, 02:51 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Position: Guppy
Posts: 761
Originally Posted by FlyGuy2112
All you flow haters are crazy. The flow is 100% worth it. If you really think it’s going to take a new hire 9 years to flow in this hiring environment you are out of your mind. Flow will have to be increased to keep up with AA’s hiring goals. Delta and United are just ramping up their hiring and attrition will continue to rise. I wouldn’tbe suprised if the entire envoy seniority list was gone in 5 years.
Far more likely is AA increasing OTS hiring to keep pace with their hiring needs. Anything else just doesn't make sense.
10-24-2018, 03:07 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,054
Originally Posted by Longhornmaniac8
Why would AA increase flow and sabotage the ops of their wholly-owned regionals? If AA increased flow in such a way that the regional couldn't limit, they would be putting immense amounts of strain on Envoy/Piedmont/PSA to cover those personnel losses. A WO will never flow more than they're contractually required to, and they'll never agree to a new contract that's going to create bigger hiring/staffing problems than already exist.
Far more likely is AA increasing OTS hiring to keep pace with their hiring needs. Anything else just doesn't make sense.
Far more likely is AA increasing OTS hiring to keep pace with their hiring needs. Anything else just doesn't make sense.
- honest 5 year flow
Or
- flow that isn't worth anything and OTS hiring at AA
10-24-2018, 03:53 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by BigZ
What do you think will hurt WO staffing more
- honest 5 year flow
Or
- flow that isn't worth anything and OTS hiring at AA
- honest 5 year flow
Or
- flow that isn't worth anything and OTS hiring at AA
10-24-2018, 03:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 579
Originally Posted by FlyGuy2112
Exactly. If AA keeps their word and keeps OTS hiring to a select few and the only way to AA is their WO’s that’s enough recruiting power. The WO’s together only flow around 550 a year. That’s not nearly enough they will need in the coming years. They’ll have no choice but to increase flow. Unless they want to sabotage their flow program.
What you all forget to understand is that AA doesn't control the flow valve as much as you all think.
remember when AA asked for 40 flows a month at the beginning of this year? how did that work out? That's right Mr. Rick Wilson told them envoy couldn't send more then the 25 a month and AA said "ok we will find the new hires another way" guess which way that was? yep you guess it......they increased off the street hires.
AA doesn't care where they get the new hires from as long as they get them. same with envoy. as along as people are in class they don't care how they get there.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
