Originally Posted by forgot to bid

1) Does that 41 include the 11 B757s that have already been taken out of service since July of last year? If not, then thats 52 B757s lost and 50 B739s replacing them. Also there's a rumor we're headed to 60ish B757s, that'd be a total loss of around 90 B757s since the 739 was ordered. So that makes the 739 almost entirely a 757 replacement, but the 739 was advertised as a 763 and 320 replacement as well. Are we still going to park from of the 16 domestic B763s or 320s?

2) Given the numbers of around 80 aircraft in the particular categories you mentioned I see a BH ratio of 1.80 (or 1.7981). 3) We have about 324 retirements between now and the end of 2015. If we are going to have net growth of 80 airframes between now and the end of 2015 that'd require about 1444 pilots (14/acft). We're hiring 300, so we need 1,144 in 2015 alone to cover aircraft already being delivered in 2015. So we'd behind the entire year in staffing by a considerable amount even with 95 pilots a month.

What the he[Rachel Maddow Show]ll are they thinking with pilot hiring? Why only announce 300 if you need nearly 5 times that in short order? Or is it we don't need 14 pilots per plane anymore? How many RES Captains and FOs are exceeding ALV now and is it already effecting pilot staffing needs?

4) 80 airframes between now and the end of 2015, or about 89 since July of last year, equals a seating inventory growth of around 11%. Put those seats in motion and take DCI to 450 jets and net the DCI 50-seaters for 76-seaters ASM swap and you've got a domestic growth of around 6-7% over a 2 year period. Or what 3%/yr give or take.

It's a lot of growth or about 3X what we've been doing for years now and even this year...So.... honest question, what's the growth for? We're going to grow our domestic fleet by 14%, grow ASMs by 6%, increase well beyond the required BH ratio... but where are these jets going? And why are we breaking our capacity constraint model out of the blue even after this week claiming we're staying the course?

And with all the growth why are we only going to hire 300 in 2014 leaving us way behind for 2015?

It reminds me of talking to these APDs in the 88 program, guy 1 is freaking out because there will be so many pilots coming through there won't be enough sims even with the E period sims for newhires and the wheels are going to come off. APD guy #2 says we were told we don't really need to hire right now.

Originally Posted by scambo1

IMO, it will have a bunch of unfilled positions. Unless someone wants to get to a specific base, what motive would there be for anyone to bid the 717b position. There is more benefit to be MDed into the category.

Originally Posted by tsquare

At least Carl's pay is safe, because bigger pays more.....

Originally Posted by newKnow

My God man, you're becoming obsessed with this!

Originally Posted by tsquare

We all should be. What we have now is stoopid.

Either that or guys should **** about 757s being replaced by 737-900s or A321s. If you are happy with the current method of payment, downgauging equipment shouldn't bother you either.

Originally Posted by tsquare

We all should be. What we have now is stoopid.

Either that or guys should shut up about 757s being replaced by 737-900s or A321s. If you are happy with the current method of payment, down-gauging equipment shouldn't bother you either.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44

I have a bigger problem with a new hire making less money flying an MD-88 than I make flying the exact same aircraft. Longevity should not even be in the equation anymore. It handcuffs us to our particular airline thus reducing our leverage to the point that we are willing to take ridiculous pay cuts to avoid starting over at year 1.

Originally Posted by newKnow

Down-gauging relative seniority due to a merger concerns me a little bit more.

One can be fixed on the next contract. (Pay.)

The other last an entire career. (SLI)

Originally Posted by tsquare

I get that to a point. However, what would your proposal be to reward those that have been here awhile? Do you really believe that a newhire should make the same coin as a guy that has been here 25 years? If you are using that as justification to keep the bigger pays more mantra, how do you propose luring quality newbies to DAL? UAL has 3 times the number of super premium flying we have, and retirements/growth going forward will blow ours out of the water. It's mostly -not all- about the Benjamins once you are in the door, and if a new guy is gonna spend 12 years in a super premium acft vs 3... how can you sell that?

Originally Posted by tsquare

I agree. That one is a toughie. Especially if it is a company that only flies a single type aircraft that is low in our fleet. (Not to worry though, with all the orders, it is rapidly becoming one of the largest fleets).