Prepare yourselves… 2023 AEs
05-22-2023, 07:36 PM
#2441
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: MD88
Posts: 456
A lot of also had a pension when we got hired that got taken away. Oh, and some of us got furloughed for 5 years and came back to ****ty pay and 5 more years being junior in right seat cuz of age 65. What would happen now if the retirement age was increased 2 years? Instead of guys upgrading in 6 months on the ER it would take them 2 1/2 years?? I think they will be ok.
05-22-2023, 07:46 PM
#2442
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,000
A lot of also had a pension when we got hired that got taken away. Oh, and some of us got furloughed for 5 years and came back to ****ty pay and 5 more years being junior in right seat cuz of age 65. What would happen now if the retirement age was increased 2 years? Instead of guys upgrading in 6 months on the ER it would take them 2 1/2 years?? I think they will be ok.
05-23-2023, 01:39 AM
#2443
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Position: Blue Juice Taste Tester
Posts: 1,363
A lot of also had a pension when we got hired that got taken away. Oh, and some of us got furloughed for 5 years and came back to ****ty pay and 5 more years being junior in right seat cuz of age 65. What would happen now if the retirement age was increased 2 years? Instead of guys upgrading in 6 months on the ER it would take them 2 1/2 years?? I think they will be ok.
05-23-2023, 01:50 AM
#2444
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: Currently freeloading
Posts: 550
JHC people, can't we just ignore the troll everytime he lays his trap at this point? This thread is about AE's, not the retirement age.
I just don't understand how they can do this at this point. A late June AE would mean Aug for first coversions, and an Oct one would mean November at the earliest. Would they really give up four months of getting A's into proper position, after months of delay already? What could that possibly save them in the long run?
I just don't understand how they can do this at this point. A late June AE would mean Aug for first coversions, and an Oct one would mean November at the earliest. Would they really give up four months of getting A's into proper position, after months of delay already? What could that possibly save them in the long run?
05-23-2023, 02:13 AM
#2445
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Position: Blue Juice Taste Tester
Posts: 1,363
JHC people, can't we just ignore the troll everytime he lays his trap at this point? This thread is about AE's, not the retirement age.
I just don't understand how they can do this at this point. A late June AE would mean Aug for first coversions, and an Oct one would mean November at the earliest. Would they really give up four months of getting A's into proper position, after months of delay already? What could that possibly save them in the long run?
I just don't understand how they can do this at this point. A late June AE would mean Aug for first coversions, and an Oct one would mean November at the earliest. Would they really give up four months of getting A's into proper position, after months of delay already? What could that possibly save them in the long run?
05-23-2023, 04:08 AM
#2446
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: LAX ER
Posts: 1,606
If they’re still planning on what to do with SLC widebody and waiting for summer conclusion to have more transparent data and trying to figure out when to close SEA 7ER, I venture to say this bid will just be a normal bid. I could totally see a large bid when they do in fact find out when SEA 7ER closes and potentially then maybe we have clarity on SLC.
We would find out from aviation websites who have cirium data first though as the 330 switching to 350 would surely make the aviation news.
just my 2c.
05-23-2023, 06:34 AM
#2447
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: On the hotel shuttle
Posts: 5,918
I can totally understand the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments.
05-23-2023, 06:53 AM
#2448
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2022
Posts: 339
So you were harmed by increasing retirement age, but increasing it again won't have that same effect on someone else? They "will be ok"? Interesting argument.
I think a German philosopher summed up this take nicely:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." ~Karl Heinrich Marx
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." ~Karl Heinrich Marx
05-23-2023, 08:12 AM
#2449
Moderator
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,867
I see both sides of this argument, and come down slightly on the side of not supporting Age 67. I find the angry arguments of those who were genuinely screwed by age 65 hugely ironic, now that they are in the hopper, but...
IF it were EVER to happen, do it now, when stagnation will be minimized due to being so underwater on hiring. Plus, that would be 2 more years of LTD payments for anyone who qualifies. And that would bridge some of the gap to fully-deferred SS benefits.
In the end, I don't think enough pilots would stick around an extra 2 years to make much of an impact on manning levels, but it would make an impact to the individual families that do.
IF it were EVER to happen, do it now, when stagnation will be minimized due to being so underwater on hiring. Plus, that would be 2 more years of LTD payments for anyone who qualifies. And that would bridge some of the gap to fully-deferred SS benefits.
In the end, I don't think enough pilots would stick around an extra 2 years to make much of an impact on manning levels, but it would make an impact to the individual families that do.
Last edited by FangsF15; 05-23-2023 at 08:48 AM. Reason: clarity
05-23-2023, 08:16 AM
#2450
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,437
Isn't this less about overall staffing, and more about 12-month rolling guarantees? Seems to me it's literally how the system works. Understaffed some parts of the year, overstaffed others, everything averages out.
If so, yes, this summer and every summer (or high-demand period) would appear under-staffed, while the opposite (over-staffed) would also occur throughout the year. And it would never be a surprise, nor an indication of a failing of the system. It is, literally, the staffing system we work under.
If so, yes, this summer and every summer (or high-demand period) would appear under-staffed, while the opposite (over-staffed) would also occur throughout the year. And it would never be a surprise, nor an indication of a failing of the system. It is, literally, the staffing system we work under.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
