Mesa Hiring
04-05-2014, 07:03 PM
#271
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: South Paw
Posts: 630
I think you're being a little generous as far as mesa staffing model....I think at the most 4-5 crews per airplane. (8 to 10 pilots/plane)
At least you're crunching the numbers and looking ahead. I've just known MAG for so f-ing long and optimism should not really being in our staffing model
At least you're crunching the numbers and looking ahead. I've just known MAG for so f-ing long and optimism should not really being in our staffing model
Last edited by skillett; 04-05-2014 at 07:26 PM.
04-05-2014, 07:08 PM
#272
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: 175 Left
Posts: 1,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by prior121
Just flew with a lineholder in IAD who's barely been here 8 years. So definitely beyond those 9 year folks. I'm about 150 people from the most Junior CA. I'm a Spring 2013 hire.
30 EJETs @ 6 CA a plane = 180 CA needed for EJETS.
4 more 900's @ 6 CA plane = 24 CA needed. So 204 CA needed for airplanes that are slated to start arriving.... well now. < This is announced flying.
10 more 900's (too be announced shortly) @ 6 CA plane = 60 CA need. Total CA needed @ 264 CA.
All (14) 900's probably on property by Dec. 2014.
15 175's and 14 900's on property by years end 2014 = 174 CA needed by 12/31/2014.
Just some numbers a CKA and I came up with flying this week.
I'm probably looking at a late 2014, early 2015 upgrade. There's a decent amount (30-50) of guys senior to the most Junior CA that are holding out for LA, IAH, or what have you.
All E175's on property by Sept 2015. (approx) = 264 CA upgrades by Sept 2015.
I think you're being a little generous as far as mesa staffing model....I think at the most 4-5 crews per airplane. (8 to 10 pilots/plane)
At least you're crunching the numbers and looking ahead. I've just known MAG for so f-ing long and optimism should not really being in our staffing model
Originally Posted by prior121
Just flew with a lineholder in IAD who's barely been here 8 years. So definitely beyond those 9 year folks. I'm about 150 people from the most Junior CA. I'm a Spring 2013 hire.
30 EJETs @ 6 CA a plane = 180 CA needed for EJETS.
4 more 900's @ 6 CA plane = 24 CA needed. So 204 CA needed for airplanes that are slated to start arriving.... well now. < This is announced flying.
10 more 900's (too be announced shortly) @ 6 CA plane = 60 CA need. Total CA needed @ 264 CA.
All (14) 900's probably on property by Dec. 2014.
15 175's and 14 900's on property by years end 2014 = 174 CA needed by 12/31/2014.
Just some numbers a CKA and I came up with flying this week.
I'm probably looking at a late 2014, early 2015 upgrade. There's a decent amount (30-50) of guys senior to the most Junior CA that are holding out for LA, IAH, or what have you.
All E175's on property by Sept 2015. (approx) = 264 CA upgrades by Sept 2015.
I think you're being a little generous as far as mesa staffing model....I think at the most 4-5 crews per airplane. (8 to 10 pilots/plane)
At least you're crunching the numbers and looking ahead. I've just known MAG for so f-ing long and optimism should not really being in our staffing model
04-06-2014, 05:21 AM
#277
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: South Paw
Posts: 630
That's strange, I'm sure it's because we cannot support that much training and staffing at the same time. I'm glad though, send those planes to Eagle where they belong.
04-06-2014, 05:29 AM
#278
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2011
Position: B747-400 CA
Posts: 373
If you are properly staffed then there should never be any JRAs.
04-06-2014, 05:54 AM
#279
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: South Paw
Posts: 630
DL had a similar staffing requirement for the E-145 when I was there and we were never properly staffed. The numbers they gave DL were false because a lot of guys had left, but Mesa still showed them active to meet the requirement.
If you are properly staffed then there should never be any JRAs.
If you are properly staffed then there should never be any JRAs.
04-06-2014, 02:09 PM
#280
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 164
In the position that you are currently in I fail to see why you would not attempt to bargain for an industry leading contract. Mesa is expanding rapidly and has recently signed agreements for a fairly significant amount of new flying . If you are ever going to be in a position to ask for substantial gains it is now. That is unless your pilots really do believe that 35k a year is fair compensation for an FO flying a 79 seat aircraft. Don't be afraid to stick your necks out and become the new benchmark of "industry leading" as opposed to always being in the middle to bottom of it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
