Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
New Hire Classes and Drops >

New Hire Classes and Drops

Search

Notices

New Hire Classes and Drops

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-15-2018 | 01:32 PM
  #541  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 25
Default

Originally Posted by pilotgolfer
And our head count is still holding steady at 12,600....after 5 years of hiring.👨*✈️👩*✈️👨*✈️👩*✈️👨*✈️👩*✈️
After next Fall you can actually use those numbers to mean something. Since we have had a good number of folks on furlough bypass for years now, you actually need to look at active pilots, not total pilot on the seniority list , to judge growth
Reply
Old 11-15-2018 | 01:46 PM
  #542  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: ORD 737
Default

Originally Posted by GoCats67
After next Fall you can actually use those numbers to mean something. Since we have had a good number of folks on furlough bypass for years now, you actually need to look at active pilots, not total pilot on the seniority list , to judge growth
Active pilots on vacancy 17-07 was 11,170. On the one that just closed it shows 11,108. Not much growth there, it seems we are just hiring for retirements.
Reply
Old 11-15-2018 | 02:54 PM
  #543  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 25
Default

Originally Posted by grappler72
Active pilots on vacancy 17-07 was 11,170. On the one that just closed it shows 11,108. Not much growth there, it seems we are just hiring for retirements.
True, but that was before the 747 fleet parking, so we went down on active numbers from then and are now on our way back up.

If you look at the minimum number that Manpower Planning wanted on the Vacancy 18-04 Min-Max document you see 10581. On the Vacancy that just closed (19-04 One year later) Min-Max you see 11021. That shows that Manpower Planning sees a need for an additional 440 pilots from a year ago.

More importantly the difference between minimum and actual is now very close (87 vs 460), so they don't have pilots in places they don't want like they used to. That means that now the increased need for pilots doesn't get filled by moving the excess from elsewhere, but gets filled by new hires.

Don't take this the wrong way, I would definitely want more and more pilots, but at least the data from Manpower now shows that we actually need more pilots. Since their view is much more important than mine, I am glad to see that even their stuff shows the need for more pilots.
Reply
Old 11-15-2018 | 02:57 PM
  #544  
pilotgolfer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,982
Likes: 0
From: A320 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by grappler72
Active pilots on vacancy 17-07 was 11,170. On the one that just closed it shows 11,108. Not much growth there, it seems we are just hiring for retirements.
Actually i think there has been significant growth. The difference is that they are getting more work out of each widget. We were certainly fat in many BES and with the shutdown of the 747, I think they have the manning more in line with what they want the utilization to be.

Reserve numbers are down, with guys flying more....at least on the 777. Not complaining...just an observation.
Reply
Old 11-15-2018 | 04:42 PM
  #545  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by pilotgolfer
Actually i think there has been significant growth. The difference is that they are getting more work out of each widget. We were certainly fat in many BES and with the shutdown of the 747, I think they have the manning more in line with what they want the utilization to be.

Reserve numbers are down, with guys flying more....at least on the 777. Not complaining...just an observation.
There's still some overmanning in some fleets/seats out there. LAX 787 comes to mind - I wouldn't be surprised to not see any vacancies there until 2020.
Reply
Old 11-15-2018 | 05:18 PM
  #546  
pilotgolfer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,982
Likes: 0
From: A320 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Andy
There's still some overmanning in some fleets/seats out there. LAX 787 comes to mind - I wouldn't be surprised to not see any vacancies there until 2020.
How is the Bus working for you?
Reply
Old 11-16-2018 | 05:59 AM
  #547  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by pilotgolfer
How is the Bus working for you?
Well, I have Christmas off.*

I'm moving up one or two every vacancy bid and have gotten lines for both Nov and Dec.

I miss WB flying; I'll give this some more time but may end up bidding back to 787 right seat. The pay difference is negligible and there's less time off on the Bus.

*I have a 30 hr layover in IND.
Reply
Old 11-16-2018 | 07:09 AM
  #548  
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,209
Likes: 6
From: 777
Default

Originally Posted by Andy
Well, I have Christmas off.*

I'm moving up one or two every vacancy bid and have gotten lines for both Nov and Dec.

I miss WB flying; I'll give this some more time but may end up bidding back to 787 right seat. The pay difference is negligible and there's less time off on the Bus.

*I have a 30 hr layover in IND.
Less time off on a narrow body is offset by the recovery time of international flying. So, at least for me, the usable time off is about the same. And, less wear and tear on the body domestic.
Reply
Old 11-16-2018 | 07:30 AM
  #549  
RJDio's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 671
Likes: 8
From: CRJ FO
Default

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
Less time off on a narrow body is offset by the recovery time of international flying. So, at least for me, the usable time off is about the same. And, less wear and tear on the body domestic.
So does that mean you’ll be bidding back to guppy captain
Reply
Old 11-16-2018 | 08:18 AM
  #550  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
Less time off on a narrow body is offset by the recovery time of international flying. So, at least for me, the usable time off is about the same. And, less wear and tear on the body domestic.
I've never had that issue when flying internationally. That includes SFO-PVG-LAX-PVG-SFO on the 787. YMMV.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Aussiedoodle
United
9
09-10-2021 12:54 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices