Anyone have a tally on the year for hiring?
09-20-2018, 04:24 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Anyone have a tally on the year for hiring?
So, last year the union put out a memo and the high end number was 1200. I think everyone said no way, but just wondering now . . . is anyone up on the latest count. Are we at least hitting 500?
09-20-2018, 06:01 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 373
Looking at the 1801V awarded on 02/18. Right around 400. Things were pretty slow until they started adding classes in June. My guess is we will come in around 600 Newhire with ~100 returning. Maybe a little better if they Continue with 2 classes every month between now and end of year.
09-20-2018, 06:41 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 662
You’ll propably need to compare the LPA too. Every pilot has worked more in the last year to suppress a little hiring. That was an unannounced direction mgmt took, and obviously negated hiring a few hundred probably. Reserves also getting used way more.
09-23-2018, 01:59 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,159
Originally Posted by 82spukram
Looking at the 1801V awarded on 02/18. Right around 400. Things were pretty slow until they started adding classes in June. My guess is we will come in around 600 Newhire with ~100 returning. Maybe a little better if they Continue with 2 classes every month between now and end of year.
1. Did we not hire as many as planned because the airline didn't add the forecasted block hours?
2. Did we not hire as many as planned because not as many pilot actually retired as were forecasted to retire?
Quite a difference between estimating hiring 1200 and only actually hiring 600.....
09-23-2018, 02:13 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Originally Posted by baseball
what would be the reason for the large difference between:Planned hiring vs. actual hiring???
1. Did we not hire as many as planned because the airline didn't add the forecasted block hours?
2. Did we not hire as many as planned because not as many pilot actually retired as were forecasted to retire?
Quite a difference between estimating hiring 1200 and only actually hiring 600.....
1. Did we not hire as many as planned because the airline didn't add the forecasted block hours?
2. Did we not hire as many as planned because not as many pilot actually retired as were forecasted to retire?
Quite a difference between estimating hiring 1200 and only actually hiring 600.....
the utilization of existing pilots while also placing much of the growth during the off peak months.
So it turns out the increase in hours was not simply an increase to the peak but an increase overall. For a gross oversimplification, an airline staffed for the July peak does not need more pilots to increase block hours in October to 85% of July instead of the previous 65%.
09-23-2018, 02:25 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 373
From my understanding a couple of things have happened.
The closing of the 747 was manpower negative and resulted in 500 less pilots needed. Increasing Line Pay Values up to the UPA maximum and driving reserve staffing from 22% to 16% (those % are from memory so they could be off by a few). Then you add in the backlog of training from displacements from 747 closing, issues with sims shipped from IAH, and the commuting benefits for IAH instructors running out which caused a large number of instructors to return to the line. This reduced the number of Narrowbody hiring that could happen. I hope most of the shinagins are over with and the hiring of ~80 pilots a month keep up. The guy currently running manpower planning also seems to have a grasp of what TK can produce and keeps filling whatever slots are open.
The closing of the 747 was manpower negative and resulted in 500 less pilots needed. Increasing Line Pay Values up to the UPA maximum and driving reserve staffing from 22% to 16% (those % are from memory so they could be off by a few). Then you add in the backlog of training from displacements from 747 closing, issues with sims shipped from IAH, and the commuting benefits for IAH instructors running out which caused a large number of instructors to return to the line. This reduced the number of Narrowbody hiring that could happen. I hope most of the shinagins are over with and the hiring of ~80 pilots a month keep up. The guy currently running manpower planning also seems to have a grasp of what TK can produce and keeps filling whatever slots are open.
09-23-2018, 03:36 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by Brahma Fear
The guy running man power likes efficiency. Anyone notice how he always posts vacancies so there are the fewest snapshots possible? I’m not criticizing I find it interesting.
If you want it, bid it. Either you will get it or not. All that matters is the final award, not the snapshots.
09-23-2018, 03:36 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: B737
Posts: 141
Snapshots are useless in general. The last two vacancy bids I've held my #1 choice on all snapshots right up to when the bid closed. Then when the actual award was published guess what....? Yup, missed the award by a mile as guys put in last minute bids like it's ebay. Sure, the snapshots are better than nothing, but don't put too much emphasis on them.
09-23-2018, 04:57 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by C11DCA
How many snapshots do you need? This current vacancy will have 6 snapshots.
If you want it, bid it. Either you will get it or not. All that matters is the final award, not the snapshots.
If you want it, bid it. Either you will get it or not. All that matters is the final award, not the snapshots.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
