johnso29

Really? Because Delta AND Northwest hired in 2007/2008. Delta hired over 700 pilots while NWA hired around 200 pilots. ZERO of those pilots have been furloughed. Delta again hired over 300 pilots in 2010. ZERO of those pilots have been furloughed.

I'm sorry for your misfortunes. But they're simply your misfortunes, not the norm.

Probe

It was not my misfortune, but the misfortune of major airline pilots since the late 70's. Every 7-10 years, along with the economic cycles, the airlines also have a cycle. 78, early 90's, 01, and 08. Most of the airlines that furloughed had new hires in training, including mine (UAL) in 78, 01, and 08. I know CAL did as well at least in 01 and 08.

Most of the bigger airlines have hired until they furloughed, and then had furloughs until they were massively understaffed.

johnso29

And I given you two separate occasions where DAL hired and did not furlough afterwards. So your statement that since DAL is close to hiring also implies that they are close to furloughing is incorrect.

gloopy

Not only that but his pattern formula of "hiring = imminent furloughs" is completely out of context. Even if the age old axiom "they hire til they furlough" is historically accurate, that's not the same as "hiring means furloughs". Even when furloughs happen right after hiring, its usually after a lot of hiring over many years and even then usually after some significant event.

By what he was saying, any pilot hiring is bad news because it automatically means furloughs are around the corner and that's just logically asinine.

Scoop

Probe,

The times - they are a changing. DAL has been making money in a poor economy - historically that never happened either. I don't think DAL is even thinking about furloughs, but stranger things have happened.


Scoop

TOGA LK

Or an opportunity has presented itself that requires hiring. Dickson may be tilting his hand with direction crew resources does not have. Hard to say at this point.

Probe

Please don't any of you take any of this personally. But when you go fly with a 20-35 year captain, please ask THEM about furloughs and careers. I believe their opinion will be different than yours. By your response, I would guess you are all 1-5 year major airline pilots.

Don't take my word for it, ask your seniors at your own airline.

Furlough protections always include "Force Mejeure" clauses. These will always be invoked, when necessary.

This isn't anti-DAL, or any other airline. Just reality. Ask the old guys you fly with.

Bucking Bar

Probe,

My father has a nearly 40 year career. He was furloughed seasonally. During the first 16 years of his career, he spent 9 on furlough.

Delta and it's pilots have adjusted to a new staffing model. While we whine a lot about it here, the truth is that the airline is mostly staffed for the shoulder months and flexes up to cover the summer and holidays.

It is very costly to adjust for furloughs with the complexity of our fleet.

Furloughs are not on the immediate horizon for Delta Air Lines.

Justdoinmyjob

Might not work at Delta. The senior guys have never been furloughed, excepting fNWAguys. Delta has furloughed only twice in 80 years. First time in the 90's and second time after 9/11. As an 01 hire who was out 4 1/2 years I got more experience then them, and have to agree. We are a long, long way from kicking people to the curb.

Herkflyr

Correct. And what a lot of the DALPA-bashers haven't acknowledged is that our new much-lamented contract has a couple of very clever provisions.

1. For starters, for the first time EVER (even during so-called "good" contracts like C2K) we have language that requires the company to park RJs if we reduce mainline flying. Before, we had language that required additional company growth if you GREW the regional flying, but NOTHING that required the company to reduced regional flying in the event of mainline cutbacks. Conceivably in prior contracts they could have eliminated every mainline flight and reduced zero regional ones--they just couldn't INCREASE the regional flying. Now if they reduced mainline flying they must also reduce regional flying.

2. If the company so much as furloughs one pilot, they must remove the extra 6 seats of every 76-seater in the system--the extra 6 seats that they wanted so bad. Further, this provision is NOT subject to force majeure.

It will be very costly and painful for the company to furlough going forward. A blanket "no pilot on the seniority list as of xxxx will be subject to furlough" is a worthless waste of negotiating capital, as the company could just claim force majeure and get around it. Instilling painful financial and operational penalties in the event of furlough is a much better contractual approach.