July 2018 Big 6 10 yr retirement percentages
07-08-2018, 03:53 PM
#21
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 88
UPS has hired just over 600 pilots since 2008. Roughly 425 of those coming after 2017. Total pilot count is just under 2800.
Retirements are picking up as guys are just now starting to max out their pensions. We also have around 35 new airframes coming thru 2022. Retirements plus growth should lead to rapid advancement.
Retirements are picking up as guys are just now starting to max out their pensions. We also have around 35 new airframes coming thru 2022. Retirements plus growth should lead to rapid advancement.
07-08-2018, 05:40 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Position: 757/767
Posts: 537
Originally Posted by Kebert Xela
All excellent points, big reason why I’m thinking of passing on an interview at FDX and stay where I am!
As a side note here’s a somewhat outdated chart of the legacy fleets. If it holds somewhat true I was surprised that AA has nearly as many if not more w/b’s than UA. Of course group 5 aircraft are retired (747s) so I’m not sure of the number of other retirements since this was published. Just thought it was interesting.
As a side note here’s a somewhat outdated chart of the legacy fleets. If it holds somewhat true I was surprised that AA has nearly as many if not more w/b’s than UA. Of course group 5 aircraft are retired (747s) so I’m not sure of the number of other retirements since this was published. Just thought it was interesting.
07-08-2018, 05:42 PM
#24
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by Kebert Xela
Thanks for the numbers Slice. Any idea of the hiring numbers each has had in the last 5 years? For example I believe FDX has hired 30% of their “list” the last few years. So 40% may retire but that won’t be the same relative movement if they just started hiring a year ago.
It’d be interesting to see a comparison of % retirements to % hired in last 5 years.
I would guess a new hire today would have greater relative seniority after 10 years at AA vs DL or FDX due to the amount of hiring they have done last couple years, not solely because of the amount of retirements alone. Any thoughts or numbers to that logic? Am I looking at incorrectly at all?
It’d be interesting to see a comparison of % retirements to % hired in last 5 years.
I would guess a new hire today would have greater relative seniority after 10 years at AA vs DL or FDX due to the amount of hiring they have done last couple years, not solely because of the amount of retirements alone. Any thoughts or numbers to that logic? Am I looking at incorrectly at all?
07-08-2018, 05:51 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Originally Posted by Kebert Xela
All excellent points, big reason why I’m thinking of passing on an interview at FDX and stay where I am!
07-08-2018, 05:54 PM
#26
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 492
Originally Posted by busdriver12
Yet there is far more to this job than how many people might retire in front of you. When you are considering pax vs cargo, there are some major differences. Some of us might prefer flying pax, others prefer cargo. After flying for one of the big three, I wouldn't trade the #1 seniority number at a pax carrier for the bottom number at FedEx, despite our last mediocre contract. You should really consider all the things that are important to you personally.
07-08-2018, 06:03 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Originally Posted by sherpster
Dumbest statement on the internet
May sound incredibly dumb to you....but it is certainly true. Not everyone has the same perspective, nor the same priorities. There is far more to the picture than how many people might retire in front of you.
07-08-2018, 06:11 PM
#28
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by busdriver12
Yet there is far more to this job than how many people might retire in front of you. When you are considering pax vs cargo, there are some major differences. Some of us might prefer flying pax, others prefer cargo. After flying for one of the big three, I wouldn't trade the #1 seniority number at a pax carrier for the bottom number at FedEx, despite our last mediocre contract. You should really consider all the things that are important to you personally.
07-08-2018, 07:58 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by busdriver12
You obviously haven't read my other 2,166 posts.
May sound incredibly dumb to you....but it is certainly true. Not everyone has the same perspective, nor the same priorities. There is far more to the picture than how many people might retire in front of you.
May sound incredibly dumb to you....but it is certainly true. Not everyone has the same perspective, nor the same priorities. There is far more to the picture than how many people might retire in front of you.
"I wouldn't trade the #1 seniority number at a pax carrier for the bottom number at FedEx, despite our last mediocre contract."
Well duh. Why would you give up #1 (777/787/350) Captain to go be bottom plug at Fedex?
07-08-2018, 08:43 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
I think he meant that this didn't sound right:
"I wouldn't trade the #1 seniority number at a pax carrier for the bottom number at FedEx, despite our last mediocre contract."
Well duh. Why would you give up #1 (777/787/350) Captain to go be bottom plug at Fedex?
"I wouldn't trade the #1 seniority number at a pax carrier for the bottom number at FedEx, despite our last mediocre contract."
Well duh. Why would you give up #1 (777/787/350) Captain to go be bottom plug at Fedex?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
