Those numbers are ARTIFICIAL. They are only in place because of the backlog in training, TK being a mess, and the uncertainty of where the bumping pilots are going.

We will have more 777-300s flying than we ever had 747s flying post-merger, this doesn't include 787s coming still, we just added two new International routes, one which will require 2 Captains and 2 FOs, and our total fleet count is going to be up at the end of the year.

Your analysis based on looking at vacancy bids going from spring into summer is a poor representation of the real world. It would be like looking at the average temperatures in your town over the last 6 months and declaring that in a year it will be 130 degrees if that rate continued.

We are certainly NOT shrinking.

We're not shrinking Dave that min max sheet is about as useless as tits on a bull. Of course our active pilots are going down we are still retiring and hiring is on hold for a couple months.

Exactly. There were a bunch of BES's that have been way overstaffed for several years. Yes, we might be shrinking the number of WB bodies, but that is because we have been paying way to many to hang around JSLED's pool and get paid.

It is nice if you are one of them, but not so good for an airline trying to compete.

So you are saying we have less pilots in the summer of 2017 than in the summer of 2016 because hiring is less than losses. Can you show me how that is growth and not shrinkage?

Our wide body fleet count will be less year end 2017 than it was year end 2016. Can you show me how that is not shrinkage?

The number of pilots on the seniority list being paid widebody pay year end 2017 will be less than year end 2016. Can you show me how that is not a shrinkage?

Our narrow body fleet has grown year over year, But our narrow body CA staffing has been relatively flat.

There are a bunch of aircraft orders and options pending over the next ten years, but we also have large amount of aircraft that are 20 + years old. Whether we grow or shrink over the next ten years is a good as anybody's guess.

I'm going to stick to my assertion that in December we will have less total pilots and airframes year over year.

Ok Dave have fun living in the Darkness.

We had a longevity based pay at CAL prior to Contract 97. The reason we switched to a differential pay system was to bring up top CA and FO pay rates. Since many more pilots top out under a longevity based pay system (even rasing the cap from a 12 year max to a 20 or 25 year cap to max out) far more pilots hit the top longevity pay numbers . This significantly lowers the top rates given the same total contractual pilot pay cost in both pay systems.

If we were to transition to a longevity pay system in our next contract we'd need significant pay increases just bring the max longevity pay up to match current CA & FO WB rates. Then on top of that negotiate further pay increases. In my opinion highly unlikely.

For a traditional International network carrier like us, I strongly believe a differential pay system is the best pay system. This honors seniority and allows senior CA's and FO's to maximize pay and retirement.

IPA at UPS is the only one I know of to successfully get their longevity pay rates up relatively high. However this has occurred over several long and intense contract battles since the late 80's early 90's.

My two cents. I like our system, but it can be tweaked to a true differential pay system which again would help the majority of our pilots and honor seniority.

Yes, this is the propaganda spewed from ALPA for the last 55 plus years that I have grown up under an ALPA contract (from a family of ALPA Pilots). This was true when we had Defined Benefit Retirement plans and a large percentage of retired Military Pilots joining the profession in their 40's. it was important to reach maximum pay when you were within 5 years of mandatory retirement age of 60.

Today we don't have these retirement programs and the majority of pilots are being hired in their twenties and thirties. Different times now and we should have a different pay scheme. Don't you think a 30 year pilot should make more than a 12 year pilot? What difference does it make what size airplane you fly. The size of the airplane doesn't represent the profitability of the job your performing. As a matter of fact today, the domestic airplanes are carrying the money losing Wide Body fleet at United.

Like I have said before, we need to start thinking outside the box and don't let tradition take us down the Rabbit Hole again and again.

Put down the crack pipe. The guppy is not carrying the 777.

30 yr pilot should have more OPTIONS on how they want to work now than a 12 yr pilot. That is exactly what the current system provides. They can chose more pay or more QOL. Even a combination of both.

Bigger/faster = more pay. It's the most basic of concepts.

If they box isn't broken you don't need to fix it.

Is your name Leonard or Jeff?????? If you're really a 787 CA I'm guessing your an 83-85 hire.

Minimum of one displacement after this one if not two. DCA 777 FO (the min number in that BES is not artificial), LAX 777 both seats, LAX 787 both seats, SFO 787 both seats, and IAH 777 both seats.

If we displace off of the 756 in any domicile other than IAH that would be a bad signal not even MOP could ignore.

Lax 777 has already been announced. It's just going through the paperwork required.

I have no doubts that the IAH 756 CA will displace again. It's insanely junior due to one base trade that allowed a ton of displacements to slide in. They tried to fix it but there were enough volunteers that it still let some folks in with almost 7000 seniority.