Carl Spackler

Exactly right.

Carl

PilotFrog

Seems to me the ER is going to target the senior 747 CAs so the junior ones won't get displaced. They don't have to make the ER enticing to a 55 yo, only to the senior guys who will retire soon anyway. All conjecture on my part, I have no idea what is being discussed.

sailingfun

I am simply smart enough to know that a growing airline does not experience a training cascade when retiring airplanes. In fact international widebody hours are projected to be 4 percent higher this winter and at least that much higher for the summer. Plenty of room to absorb those pilots without a cascade. It's not higher math as quite a few others have also pointed out here. The block hours are not going away they are shifting to other fleets.
I have seen no position from the company so not sure how I am posting it. I guessed I missed the memo. Trust me on this, retiring 16 aircraft over a 24 to 36 month period will not even have the training department breathing hard let alone the chaos you predict.

EdGrimley

Exactly right. It's a strategy they use. SF will say "this is good for pilots...the company probably wouldn't want it" (ignoring the fact SD is already talking about it).

Then we get an email saying "as always we are looking for opportunities to improve upon our situation...time value of money, etc" from the union....and we just found one! Details to follow. Then SF says, wow I didn't think the company would go for it! We win. When in fact the company got exactly what they wanted, cost savings, and we got snookered again.

TOGA LK

Agree 100%. Isn't Carl like 48 years old?

shiznit

That's a good point and I agree, it'd be necessary to have something in it for other pilot categories too.

Pineapple Guy

Here's some data, fwiw:

Average age of the 50 oldest 747 Captains: 63.3
Average age of the 50 most junior 747 Captains: 59.1
Average age of the 100 oldest on the seniority list: 64.3
747 Captains among the 100 oldest: 10

So, if they offer an early out that's not targeted, and assume they offer to 100 (no idea how many they might actually want) I'm guessing the average age of those who take it will be 63.5+, and they'll only attract perhaps a dozen 747 Captains, meaning I can't see much value in this to Delta.

OTOH, if both parties agree to target only 747A's (something I hope we DON'T agree to), and they take 50 guys, there would be literally hundreds of non-747 guys who would be older, and likely more interested.

But, OTOH, if they make no agreement, and those 59 year old guys displace, I'm sure a few will retire, but probably not many. Going 6 years early is a lot of money to give up.

I don't have the answer, but both methods have some potential downside.

EdGrimley

Good info PG. Btw, from a real life standpoint, I think most guys would say they felt no benefit from previous early retirement programs. Jettisoning guys a couple years early without replacement/growth aircraft NOW, there is no benefit to the pilot group. It would be better to keep the extra guys around. If that happens the company would likely elect to keep the category overstaffed until the guys at the top retire. That is, unless they are planning even more 747's to go to the bone yard in the next couple years.

alfaromeo

Ding, ding, ding, you have the answer. The primary cost of the displacements are not the training cascade, it is having an overstaffed category. They sit down three planes in September and one more in October. The displacement bid won't be until January. Therefore, you will have a significant number of 747 pilots that are excess for several months. Targeting that group would make sense to the company. An open early out program would give money to pilots that they need to fly and then they will have to pay to train their replacments and possibly deal with the cascade up along with more new hires. The company doesn't want or need that and therefore they won't pay for it.

This is not some point where either side has great leverage over another. If there is no early out, then these guys will displace to positions that are growing and need pilots anyway. The company will absorb those costs rather than chucking a bunch of money at an early out program. Pilots generally would like having more senior guys retire, but as Pineapple Guy points out, many of them have one foot out the door already. The only thing that makes sense for both sides is a size limited targeted plan, maybe to both 777 and 747 categories. While we all love to see hundreds of guys leave early with some broad generous plan, there is absolutely zero incentive for the company to cough up that cash. It would be very expensive to them both on the front end in paying off the pilots and on the back end by having a lot of added training costs.

I don't know anything about this early out negotiation, but if anyone expects something as large as the last one, they are fooling themselves. The last one paid for itself because we were grossly overstaffed in 2012. This one would only pay for itself if it eliminates the 747 overstaffing. Anything that costs the company lots of extra money, they have no interest in I am sure.

Purple Drank

In the past 12 hours we've seen gomerglideslope, karnak, humboldt, pineapple guy, shiznit, fly4hire, slow play, and alfaromeo post in support of a buyout in return for....nothing. (I'm sure I'm missing some). The were among the big pushers during C12.

That should tell us all we need to know.