Heard various ideas for years. I've never understood how this one works. You're on the AA seniority list, but flying for PDT? How does that work with AA vacancies, etc? What happens to the OTS/mil hire that goes directly to AA. He/she watches for years as PDT pilots come to AA and bump him/her lower..?

I've heard the WOs just go away and you merge/staple, etc, but I never heard any logical explananyion of the idea above.

It could work exactly like MIL leave. Thousands of pilots do it at the majors every year. You’re on the list, but that’s it. Not saying that’s what will happen, but certainly it’s a lot cleaner of an option than SLI (if only for the WO’s).

Your PDT / AA seniority is at the coroprate level (for things like travel benefits), not the APA contract/union level. Different contract, different union.

There's a lively dicsussion over on the American forum about seniority in the event the WO's get absorbed into AAL. Not surprisingly, the AA pilots chiming in there are overwhelming in favor of using the stapler. It won't go over well if an 8 year PDT pilot merging into AA jumps up the list above several thousand mainline pilots. ALPA is trying to get the AA pilots to vote to switch to them from APA, though. Not sure what, if any, provisions would be in an ALPA contract for handling a merger like this.

Just my opinion, but it's not the same at all. My example is the young, 1,500/CFI PDT guy doesn't have the credentials to be hired OTS, but gets a number and is senior to those that do..? The mil guy that was able to be and was hired by AA, is just off property. Not arguing at all, truly interested in angles I haven't considered. I just don't see any version of "can't get hired at AA" but have an AA number working. At least not if Piedmont is on the side of the RJs. If all AA new-hires start in an RJ, that's different, but now you're talking a whole other ballgame.

Back in 2017 one of the VPs at Piedmont said the 10 year plan was to merge the WOs and then add them to the bottom of AAs seniority list. 2 years ago that same VP said AA didn't want to grant seniority #s to WO pilots directly while at the WO over concerns of how it would change the dynamics with other labor groups (single carrier filing from the unions, making everyone mainline with pay and benefits).

The 145 has about 5 years of life left to it. There is no one for one replacement. 175s and CRJ 9s have been flying into ROA. Allegedly mx can fit 2 175s into the hangar, so they want to build a new hangar to fit 4. There is no change to the MX hangar on the ROA airport expansion plan so that's nowhere close to happening if true (probably 5+ years). Sim guys have been telling people that it won't be on the certificate, but Piedmont HIRED pilots will be flying the 175 sooner or later.

Could be the beginning of that 10 year plan (which has probably changed 20 times since it first came out), but could be a lot of hype for something the rug gets pulled out from under at the last minute with little explanation and no apologies as has happened many times at Piedmont (PDT was supposed to get 170/175s twice already and AA changed plans after seeing how much of a 💩 show the Piedmont operation was... StAArfleet Command even raffled away the Piedmomt 170 model they kept at SBY years ago after they didn't have any use for it anymore.)

If they do merge the 3 WO pilot groups, maybe it'll be back under one name, separate from AA in order to keep the inflight and mx wages depressed, and they'll keep the two ground handling sides of Envoy and Piedmont.

Anyway they slice it, it's going to be a long process to wind down Piedmont flight ops. Highly doubt anyone who has left Piedmont will regret it. Almost everyone who did leave had the opportunity to be back at AA within 6 months of their departure.

Think you’re misinterpreting what I’m saying. Hypothetically, a PDT pilot could go to AA INDOC , then immediately take a leave to go fly at Piedmont. Nothing to do with our current employee numbers. Then, a PDT pilot could accrue seniority at AA prior to flow to incentivize staying within AA.

Another option: take your longevity for pay with you when you flow. Start at year 5 pay.

Agree, for EL or MK to say something like that with such confidence just makes me wonder. Especially since I’ve heard about this conversation from at least three different people. No one really cares if they fly a 145 or 175, more money would be cool but doubtful. Just makes me think the only big thing that could be offered is seniority or advanced pay banding ( like we’ve been doing for prior 121 guys)

Article mentions nineteen Embraer regional jets will join the fleet of American Airlines Group subsidiary Envoy Air which with the additional aircraft will bring Envoy’s total fleet commitment to 169 (126 E175s and 43 E170s). No mention of Piedmont Airlines and a much needed replacement for the ERJ145 if Piedmont is to contimnue flight operations beyond the next 5-10 years. However, the article does mention that American/Envoy has 30 ERJ145s in storage.

Envoy Air Grows Fleet With 19 More Embraer E-Jets Aviation Week Network

CPs have said pilots regretted flowing to AA because health insurance was so much more expensive when they heard people talked about applying outside the flow, so it really could be some insignificant thing that changes that they latch onto like it's gold.

Seniority/longevity sound like a great deal, but Pandora's box will open. My class flowed in 2023, would we get the 6+ year plus up to longevity for our sentence at PDT or remain on year 1 while someone still at PDT comes in at year 6 when they flow? How far will longevity credit go back? Is there a cap to it? Stuff like that. A straight DOH staple is probably best for AA from a financial perspective if they go down that road, but then that will alienate a lot of the OTS military and OAL pilots they're targeting for hiring when 3,000 WO pilots get seniority numbers at once.

With hiring slowing down at the majors that may end up being something they don't have to make a decision about for years, especially if age 67 comes into fruition.