PDT News and Rumors
02-02-2009, 06:40 AM
#361
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: RJ FO
Posts: 171
I think it might be a while before PDT hires. PSA AWAC and RAH all do flying for Airways too and all have people on furlough. I am not saying that PDT WONT hire before the furloughs come back but.......
02-05-2009, 01:18 PM
#366
Kerbal Rocket Surgeon
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DTW 717A
Posts: 1,099
A week ago, they announced the new occurence policy.
Why? There are many reserves only flying ~15 hours/month. Made no sense.
Fast forward a few days, and they announce fleet reductions/pending furloughs.
It all makes sense now.
Why? There are many reserves only flying ~15 hours/month. Made no sense.
Fast forward a few days, and they announce fleet reductions/pending furloughs.
It all makes sense now.
02-05-2009, 01:55 PM
#367
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: bar stool
Posts: 771
Wonder what will happen to the other 11 aircraft.
What a crap-shoot.
I wonder if they will try to pull a "If you take concessions... maybe we can make financial sense to keep those 11 airplanes.." Considering this is great timing for negotiating the new contract.
What a crap-shoot.
I wonder if they will try to pull a "If you take concessions... maybe we can make financial sense to keep those 11 airplanes.." Considering this is great timing for negotiating the new contract.
02-05-2009, 04:07 PM
#369
Kerbal Rocket Surgeon
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DTW 717A
Posts: 1,099
its 7 more stoki, not 11. We just lost 4, 7 more are expiring later this year for a total of 11.
Right now we have 458 on the CA+FO list (not including leaves) with 55 A/C. Thats 8.3 pilots per aircraft to maintain our current 'fat' staffing levels. So a loss of 4 aircraft would mean ~33 pilots would be getting bumped in order to maintain the same staffing level that we have now.
A loss of 7 more would be an additional 58 pilots, bringing our potential total up to 91.
Considdering how heavy we are on reserves, I wouldn't be surprised to see even more than that.
It ain't right - the most cost effective airplane in the Airways fleet and here we are giving them back.
Right now we have 458 on the CA+FO list (not including leaves) with 55 A/C. Thats 8.3 pilots per aircraft to maintain our current 'fat' staffing levels. So a loss of 4 aircraft would mean ~33 pilots would be getting bumped in order to maintain the same staffing level that we have now.
A loss of 7 more would be an additional 58 pilots, bringing our potential total up to 91.
Considdering how heavy we are on reserves, I wouldn't be surprised to see even more than that.
It ain't right - the most cost effective airplane in the Airways fleet and here we are giving them back.
02-05-2009, 05:01 PM
#370
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 62
Just wondering if management at PDT is taking a page out of PSA's play book.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
