Is it likely that some airlines or all of them will give the pilots incentives to retire early to keep from shelling out top CA pay for another 5 years?

 

Take a look at FO pay for the first few years at certain post-BK majors...

$170K - $40K = $130K/year

That could easily cover some buyout packages.

 

You guys really do not understand the economics of this. A 200k CA is NOT replaced by a 30K new hire! The retiring pilot is replaced by another 200k CA. The upgrading FO is replaced by a 30k new hire and all the training events that ensue wipe out any savings that might occur from the upgrading FO to the new hire.

Every airline has several different dynamics involved but the point is this: When a pilot retires it's at best a wash money wise for the company. At worst it can cost them a million in training to replace 1 guy who retires. And, if a pension is involved, pension money starts coming out the day he/she retires. Much better to SHORTEN the time interval from retirement until death not lengthen it. Ideally, shorten the time interval to zero. If retiree medical benefits are involved now you have more people on health care coverage. The list is much longer than this but I think you get the idea.

 

$1 MILLION to replace a CA??? What are you guys using for training? Real wide-bodies?

I think most training events costs $30-$50K...even assuming a few transitions along with the upgrade and the new-hire it still doesn't look like a million bucks to me.

 

Like I said best case a wash, WORST case 1M.

This happens when an airline has several aircraft types and one retirement triggers a cascade of training events not just 2. Costs include the higher staffing required to cover flying while everyone is in the school house playing musical chairs. Costs for the training. Costs for salaries of guys in training. These are just a few items there are more.

 

I have heard of some ridiculous costs to training when someone "moves up" due to the cascade effect... When all is said and done, if it costs a cool million I would look twice with curiosity, but not surprise.

 

The cascade effect would go away if companies would pay based on longevity rather than aircraft type. UPS anyone?

 

That's true Saab 2000. That works if you have something to bargain for, like a company with a healthy profit. If not, paying the same for all airframes loses bargaining power.

 

much of this is due to mismanagement, but we have a higher percentage of people in long term training than anyone else out there. Constant shuffling of seats trying to get people on the right equipment. It is not the panacea you might think

 

He's right.

For example:

At AWA there was one payscale as well.

The difference between Cactus and Brown is that Cactus would be content and stay overstaffed or understaffed in certain seats to spare the training costs. And there were only 3 types to deal with in 1.25 bases (LAS is a VERY small understaffed base ).

Here at Brown, it seems that they will retrain if they forsee being 3 crews over in any seat or base. With 4 bases and 6 equipment types, the cascade effect of moving those 3 crews multiplies quickly, even without a/c diferential pay ... FWIW.

Later, brown CC