Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-10-2013, 02:05 PM
  #125411  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 167
Default

2023 is a DECADE away, Johnso
MD88Driver is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:07 PM
  #125412  
Gets Weekends Off
 
buzzpat's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
Default

Originally Posted by daldude
Sailing,

I think most of the Jr FO's understand what you are saying, I think this board is a just a place to vent. I think there is a fair amount of frustration, because while nobody is looking for sympathy I feel that most Capt's and senior pilots have no clue as to what our career prospects have turned into. I for example was with a Capt the other day who asked why I had not bid Capt on the 88 after being here for 13 years. I then explained that I was still in the bottom 17% of the list and had approximately 11 years to go until I would break into the top 50% of the list. He actually did not believe me until I showed him that we only have 578 retirements between now and 2017. He then proceeded to tell me he could not relate and that he did not know how he could have sent his kids to college if he had not up graded in 11 years. My daughter starts the University of Texas next fall I was actually depressed after that portion of the conversation.

In fact you pointed out in a earlier post that you had a pretty slow (non rocket ship) up grade to Capt at 13 years. With 2001 hires looking at 23 years I actually thought 13 years was pretty good where you thought it was pretty fair at best. You pointed out you were and SO for 5 years, I was furloughed for 6 years. I actually thought having a job as an SO for 5 years looked pretty good where you thought is was not so good. Different perspectives.

But I think the biggest difference in the us and the (Cattle Barron's)(just a joke) is that in the past Delta pilots were jr for a relatively short period in their careers. You for example where jr as and SO for 5 years but then you moved up to senior FO then Capt by 13 years. Where as my generation will still be in the bottom 20% of the seniority list after 17 years. So the whole "I was jr once comparisons" and "you will be senior one day" remarks don't seem to apply.

So while I don't refute that Delta added Capt positions. The way this bid is falling out the Jr. FO's like me, Roadkill and many others see mass displacements to smaller aircraft as well as crew resources stating "we do not plan to hire to replace vacancies" I know you keep saying we are going to hire. But that is not what crew resources is publishing they are saying "we do not plan to hire to replace vacancies". I did go to the road show a couple of weeks ago and they pumped everybody up by saying we are going to hire, then they decide to shut down the DC9's a year early so they can continue to delay hiring. If SD and company had just said that we are going to displace 700 pilots and shut down the DC9's early so we can fund the 717 and build up 737's, I feel other than the short term riot in the pilot lounge I could have at least respected them for telling the truth.

Keep posting though, we all need the pep talks to counter the reality of being displaced off of narrow body aircraft after 13 years.
The best, most accurate post illustrating our peer group at Delta that I've ever read. I'm at 12 years and am resigned to never being a CA. Only have 9 years left. I still love my job and don't hold anybody else accountable. It is what it is. Just don't blow smoke up my ass about our future prospects and how fortunate we are.
buzzpat is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:09 PM
  #125413  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Posts: 272
Default

Originally Posted by SailorJerry
The DAL Openboard. Publishes the age of all people that drop off the seniority list. I lopped off everyone that was under 55 and arrived at 62 and 7 months.

If the company can buy people out at 62.5 and make it make financial sense, then they'll continue to do so. They wouldn't be doing it if they didn't think it'd make sense.

I'm pretty sure someone in Crew Resources is smart enough to make a histogram.
I did the same but removed all of the early outs and came up with 64 and 4 months. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I'm pretty sure from a statistical view point you have to remove the early outs to come out with a non artificially reduce retirement age. I will have to think on it. I agree crew resources should be able to sort it out, but I can't help but think they are using historical numbers prior to retirement loss and pay cuts. Even Johnson alluded to using retirement numbers prior to 2007 when he referenced people going prior to age 60.

Also, in roadshow 2 weeks ago they specifically said no more early outs. They needed everybody to stay so they could avoid hiring. OK I added the avoid hiring part.
daldude is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:10 PM
  #125414  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 488
Default

Originally Posted by SailorJerry
Not even Crew Resources is expecting everyone to go to 65. The data is pretty clear on a mid 62 average retirement age.
Ok.

I never said all would go to 65. Just like I never said that 578 is all the retirements we would get during that time period.

578 is the number slated to turn 65 in that time frame. Period. If anyone has a problem with that number, then I suggest you contact whoever is publishing it.
APCLurker is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:14 PM
  #125415  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by APCLurker
No. I absolutely never said the bolded part whatsoever, and again: "prove it" as you so liked to tell others.

Where did I ever say that 578 are all the retirements we are going to get during that time period? That is the number that turn 65 during that period. I never said that is all we would get. Once again, as apparently it needs to be repeated, it was referencing people's belief that we have alot more than that retiring very soon due to turning 65. I'm not talking about what -might acutally- happen in addition. That is the number turning 65 in that period. I said that there are 578 turning age 65 durinig that period. And I'm not even the one that originally said it!

Again, I never said that 578 retirements is all we are going to get. Prove that I did.

And I noticed you conveniently avoided my challenge on the age 65 accusation. Still waiting for your proof on that one as well. I never said it was happening.

I also find it interesting that the opinions I expressed are basically the same as daldudes, yet his posts are ok....
Here's the proof...

Originally Posted by APCLurker
Any predictions over 5 years out in this industry are entirely irrelevant. Far too much can change. Age 6_ anyone? Those retirements causing advancement also assumes an expanding (or even status quo) seniority list. No hiring means you are still the same % from the bottom.
The bold red letter sentence is your response to my post of how many retirements are scheduled from 2017 through 2023. So any predictions(those numbers aren't predictions BTW) beyond 5 years are entirely irrelevant. But numbers over the next 5 years are what? Reliable? Unreliable? Irrelevant?

WRT the Age 65 challenge, you stated "Far too much can change. Age 6_ anyone?" So if you accept that the possibility exists that it can change, then you must accept the possibility that DAL won't continue to shrink and people will advance as those 578 retire.

BTW, daldude has been exchanging cordial discussion. As opposed to implying or flat out stating that I have reading comprehension issues. Maybe we have the same point, and we are just screaming past each other. My initial point was that the numbers are there. You don't have to agree that it will cause a rocketship ride. I wasn't expecting you to. Just that they're there. sailingfun is the one who called it a rocketship.

Even I live by the belief that anything can happen. Sorry for the mudslinging.
johnso29 is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:15 PM
  #125416  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by MD88Driver
2023 is a DECADE away, Johnso
That doesn't change the scheduled retirement numbers. That was my point. That and that anything can happen...bad or good.
johnso29 is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:18 PM
  #125417  
Line Holder
 
A6danimal's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Quality and Craftsmanship since 1966
Posts: 92
Default

Originally Posted by SailorJerry
But anyone who may have been 55 and reasonably invested to retire in early 2009 is gonna be ready to go here real soon.
To quote Dr. Seuss (from Marvin K Mooney) "Would you PLEASE GO NOW?!"
A6danimal is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:23 PM
  #125418  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Default

Originally Posted by daldude

I did the same but removed all of the early outs and came up with 64 and 4 months. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I'm pretty sure from a statistical view point you have to remove the early outs to come out with a non artificially reduce retirement age. I will have to think on it. I agree crew resources should be able to sort it out, but I can't help but think they are using historical numbers prior to retirement loss and pay cuts. Even Johnson alluded to using retirement numbers prior to 2007 when he referenced people going prior to age 60.

Also, in roadshow 2 weeks ago they specifically said no more early outs. They needed everybody to stay so they could avoid hiring. OK I added the avoid hiring part.
Well nothing before 07 is valid. That'd be like using sour milk in your statistical cereal. I doubt Johnso would say that.

If they said no more early outs then that means that hiring is gonna be within 12-24 months or so and more of the bubble is getting close to 65 anyway.

Did you assume zero retirements and attrition in the early out months? Even natural attrition off the seniority list is averaging over 10 a month since early 2011. And that's with nearly zero scheduled retirements. Not all were active pilots, but the buffer between required pilots and hiring is, over time, becoming a lesser excuse.

I feel like they're being honest when they say they've got the bodies where they need them finally, so I'm not surprised the talking point is to stay.

Hiring is a capital expenditure. A new hire is a $3500 a month money pit for at least 2 months, not to mention the significant cost of travel, lodging, background checking, and all the rest. We can't even get $300 iPads. How can you rationalize $2.7 million to hire 300 pilots? Of course the bean counters want to see the $10 billion debt mark before they cough up a couple million to ramp up an expensive process.
SailorJerry is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:25 PM
  #125419  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Default

Originally Posted by A6danimal

To quote Dr. Seuss (from Marvin K Mooney) "Would you PLEASE GO NOW?!"
*With all due respect*

Bout time Cal...

Too soon?
SailorJerry is offline  
Old 03-10-2013, 02:28 PM
  #125420  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,423
Default

Originally Posted by daldude
Johnson,

That same letter also says "The DC9 will be down 21% as we begin 2013 with 16 aircraft in scheduled service". So clearly they new the 9's were going to be in service in 2013.

Then I was lead to believe by crew resources that they were going to stay through summer 2014 and this was stated in a road show 2 weeks ago.

All I'm saying is that the pilot group deserves the truth with regards to growth and hiring. Don't give me some RA RA road show when the plan is to fund from with in and displace. The truth would earn much more of my respect. Which of course they could care less about since I am simply one of the masses.
They actually put out in a earlier message they expected to award AE's on the nine in this bid. That changed by parking them early.
sailingfun is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 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