Am I doing the math wrong, or is that a net gain of 50?

OK, I guess they also mentioned 180-200 retirements per year.

 

You are doing the math wrong its a wash.

 

Losing 5 NB gaining 7 WB.

 

Nope. There has to be a vacancy, No one is getting pushed out of the MD or 777.

 

That makes no sense. Absoutely someone senior utilizing Stand In Bid can go displace someone junior to them in another position.

Imagine if they closed the Airbus and had nothing but 757 FO openings, and every other category stays the same, you're saying senior Airbus captains have to be 757 FOs ... ridiculous.

 

Nope. Wrong again. The company will have to create vacancies for those being displaced or they would have to furlough. Where do you think the junior guys on the MD or 777 are going to go if there are no openings anywhere else? You think the company is going to send guys to fleets that are downsizing? Yep, Bunch of guys getting sent to the A300, no.

 

This is wrong. There are 100 excesses in the bid. There are 100 vacancies in the bid. The bid also said that there may be pilots placed in the right seat of the 777, MD11, and MEM767. Anyone can bid for those vacancies. If you are senior to someone being excessed, you get to bid on the vacancy first. Once all of the vacancies are filled, if there are still pilots that are being excessed, they will displace pilots junior to them. So yes, pilots could be excessed out of the 777 or MD. You have to look at the current, min, and max manning levels in the bid to determine vacancies. If current is less than min, there is a vacancy. If current matches min, but is less than max, they can, but don't have to award a pilot to that seat. That is basically a buffer for the bottom pilots before they are displaced.

 

There is a reason the union sent out a comm recommending everyone review the Q&A from 23-01 and 24-01.


2. A broader picture.


There are basically four components in this System Bid:

i. Base Closures (e.g., 11CA)

ii. Reductions in numbers in crew positions (e.g., 77CM)

iii. Crew positions the Company is willing to go “fat” (Max>Min) (e.g., 67FM); those will only

be available to those pilots in crew positions that have pilots “subject to assignment” (e.g.,

11CL)

iv. “Vacancies” (77FM and 57FM)


All those buckets will run simultaneously in the System Bid processing based on a set of operating

principles found in Section 24 and the OIM.


If you are a pilot that is not initially part of the four above, it does not mean you are “protected” in

your seat, especially if you are relatively junior in that seat. More senior pilots coming into your seat,

though it may be static as to Current, Max, and Min (e.g., 67CI), may result in pilots in your seat being

“pushed out.”


Where a pilot ends up will be determined by system wide seniority.

 

The option for a senior pilot to "Stand In" bid depends on the seniority of the pilot(s) they're standing in for, not their own.

If the number one Airbus CA had a crazy idea to "stand in" for one of the 25 CAs being excessed, he goes with their seniority, not his. So he can't just decide to bid to whatever seat he can hold system wide and bid to 767 IND or OAK because there are no vacacncies in those seats and every CA in those two bases are senior to the 25 MEM 300 CAs being targeted. So yes, any seat in the system where the junior pilot is still senior to the pilots in the seats being excessed is "protected". Not a single IND or OAK 767 CA is in danger of being pushed out. The only way any different pilots get into those seats is if one of those CA bids out. Then that secondary vacancy would be filled by seniority.

 

Think bigger. Not just CA's. Junior FO's on WB's are likely to get excessed because of the very scenario that you've described.