Sliceback

Typical furlough math (everything in life has exceptions) - not furloughs unless it's 5%. Bad furloughs are 15%. 9/11 was up to 20% but a couple of ALPA carriers hit 25%.

Will a bigger airline have larger numbers? Of course. 100 pilots and 10 get furloughed? People yawn...but it's 10% of the airline. Airline with 10,000 pilots furloughs 500? National news...but it's only 5%.

Used to be, due to training costs associated with retraining across fleets, that furloughs less than a year typically didn't happen and 2 years was a more common cutoff. Rebound expected in 12, 18, or 24 months? The company wouldn't furlough.

Retirements are part of the math. AA as an example - 14,500 (?) line pilots. 800 (?) in the next 2 years? That's 5.5% a year. Stop hiring and it's the same as furloughing 5.5%. Two years of retirements is 11% reduction in the pilot corps. So if you get 5-10% below you and add in the up coming retirements you're probably safe from a furlough.

Rule of thumb (ignoring the impact of retirements) - 5% is the first furlough risk mitigation number. 15% is furlough protection absent a Black Swan event, Nothing can protect you from furlough if you went to a weak airline in the first place.

I'd focus on the percentages of any announced furloughs. It's the same with 'large' aircraft orders - what's the percentage? Large hiring numbers? What's the percentage?

This is mostly related to economic cycles. The Max delivery delay or the PW engines issues are a whole different issue.

BlueScholar

I just like the idea that a single airline, offering flights only in Alaska, Reno, Nashville and Ontario, with a fleet of 10 prop planes and 4 757's, with 2 fatal crashes in the past 8 years on their record is supposed to be representative of the entire industry.

JulesWinfield

To give some perspective to this, I was hired a little more than a year ago at AA and am 86% company wide.

rickair7777

Likely. It worked well with the rapid rebound after covid, and is a less severe committment for management than shifting the entire training pipeline into reverse, especially at multi-fleet airlines.

Sliceback

Getting hired right before a large influx of bodies behind you is a huge protective buffer!

From the seniority list -

March 2020 newhire at AA - 71%
March 2021 ....none
March 2022 - 78%
March 2023 - 89%

March 2024 newhire projections in a year? 89% . Assumes 1,800 newhires and 800 retirements.

The previous newhire projections in March 2025?
March 2020 newhire? 63%
March 2022 newhire? 69%
March 2023 newhire? 78%

Retirements AND hiring is greating crazy advancements AND protection.

WHACKMASTER

But, but, but, should I go to SWA or AA? 🙄

SonicFlyer

I didn't write the article, nor did I make any comments on it. I am just passing it along for discussion. The gist of it is that industry wide hiring seems to be slowing down signifigantly. If the only thing you pull out of it are a couple of statements you consider "anti-union" then maybe you should reflect and ask yourself why you think everything you see is "anti-union" and if you are being myopic?

myrkridia

The claim is you are anti-union. Not everything anyone posts.

hoover

I have a feeling it's just going to be a pause in hiring. Once the max and P&W issues get worked out itll be on like donkey Kong again.

fcoolaiddrinker

The cost of furlough also went up as most agreements now include longevity for street time. I believe only delta had this 911?