A question from an ASA furloughed pilot
05-11-2009, 08:13 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: crj-200 FO
Posts: 479
Thanks for all the replies. I think what got me thinking about the furloughs and if they were effective in cutting cost was the thread about the SKW Inc. earnings call. When I read that they referenced the furloughs as a cost cutting measure was about the same time I got the email about the summer flying and bringing back everyone on leave and building the lines over guarantee. The fact that they referenced the furloughes at that time when they already knew what the summer had in store felt like a slap to the face. I realize they didn't know what the summer would look like in Feb., but if they're not saving money from the furlough they should own up to it. I guess we'll have to wait for the 2nd quarter earnings call, but I'm not gonna keep my fingers crossed that they'll own up to it then. Probably just say that the furloughs saved them money again.
05-11-2009, 08:17 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 264
I understand what you're saying, but with the way that airline pilot compensation is structured that is not unfailing logic as I tried to illustrate in my original post.
05-12-2009, 08:23 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 284
Nice post.
Simple numbers show the inadequate staffing for the summer. Roughly 10% more flying, 10 more airplanes, at least 80 less pilots (attrition) might make for a rough summer operationally speaking.
Fact is, could they have kept us around? Yes. Did they want to with the current projections? No.
All this is still water under the bridge, but more importantly that if/when there are plans for any of the airplanes and/or and increase in block hours for the fall/winter, they need to start owning up and bringing at least some back on property.
Simple numbers show the inadequate staffing for the summer. Roughly 10% more flying, 10 more airplanes, at least 80 less pilots (attrition) might make for a rough summer operationally speaking.
Fact is, could they have kept us around? Yes. Did they want to with the current projections? No.
All this is still water under the bridge, but more importantly that if/when there are plans for any of the airplanes and/or and increase in block hours for the fall/winter, they need to start owning up and bringing at least some back on property.
05-12-2009, 08:30 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: A320
Posts: 244
When did they start pulling them from service? Was it July? I forget how many were in service in the summer/fall
Disregarding the loss of the ATR's, its still 10% more flying with about ~100 less pilots than last summer.
Disregarding the loss of the ATR's, its still 10% more flying with about ~100 less pilots than last summer.
05-12-2009, 09:19 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
As much as I'd like the furloughees back, it would really suck to come back for two months and then get sent home again in September.
As for the cost of bringing them back, why would it cost more than the pro-check and recurrent flight/ground that should be due now anyway? Just curious why people think it would cost so much.
05-12-2009, 09:36 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: I can fly.....I'm a pilot
Posts: 442
A lot of the instructor pilots are being pulled now to do line flying in both seats. Also, when did the furloughees actually start line flying? Maybe 20-30 in May, 30-40 in June and the rest in July?
As much as I'd like the furloughees back, it would really suck to come back for two months and then get sent home again in September.
As for the cost of bringing them back, why would it cost more than the pro-check and recurrent flight/ground that should be due now anyway? Just curious why people think it would cost so much.
As much as I'd like the furloughees back, it would really suck to come back for two months and then get sent home again in September.
As for the cost of bringing them back, why would it cost more than the pro-check and recurrent flight/ground that should be due now anyway? Just curious why people think it would cost so much.
05-13-2009, 06:17 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 903
A lot of the instructor pilots are being pulled now to do line flying in both seats. Also, when did the furloughees actually start line flying? Maybe 20-30 in May, 30-40 in June and the rest in July?
As much as I'd like the furloughees back, it would really suck to come back for two months and then get sent home again in September.
As for the cost of bringing them back, why would it cost more than the pro-check and recurrent flight/ground that should be due now anyway? Just curious why people think it would cost so much.
As much as I'd like the furloughees back, it would really suck to come back for two months and then get sent home again in September.
As for the cost of bringing them back, why would it cost more than the pro-check and recurrent flight/ground that should be due now anyway? Just curious why people think it would cost so much.
The reality is that very few of us could potentially be back within a year. That said, if we are furloughed for longer than 12 months a whole "Initial" training program must be completed.
That means.
Basic Indoc (again)
Systems (Again)
GenOps (Again)
CPTs (Again)
Sim Training (Again)
IOE (Again)
Differences (Again)
Also, paying us 2nd year pay at MMG for the whole training process. That also means paying our IPs their appropriate wage for providing flight training. It won't be cheap, and it will largely be a shot in the foot (as already indicated by the OP's initial math regarding this summer).
You see, it's not just a simple PC/recurrent if we're out of the 121 training environment for more than 12 months. As already illustrated, none of us will be back during the summer time and there is a somewhat likelihood that more people will be joining us come September.
Honestly, I don't care. I've managed to find my way into a great opportunity with a new company no where near related to aviation and the bull**** we have to deal with, nor the backstabbing management either.
So, I'll patiently wait a recall. If it's next year (Spring 2010) like everyone has indicated already, fine. If its 2 years, excellent, fine. But it won't be anytime soon.
I for one, really can't put my family through two furloughs in one year. Flying planes professional is not suppose to be a part time / seasonal / temporary endeavor. We're professionals and should not be treated as summertime help between school.
05-14-2009, 04:14 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 326
Sorry, should have been more clear - if you were recalled this month, why would it cost more than getting a PC (which is due this month anyway)? A lot of folks are saying we didn't recall for the summer flying because of the cost but no one can explain why. Again, that wouldn't be fair to you guys but I don't get why people are saying it would cost so much to recall now.
05-14-2009, 04:32 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
So I've got a lot of time on my hands while on furlough. .....I realize there are some numbers that I just don't know. I took very conservative numbers and tried to figure out how much the decision to cut costs by furloughing is going to end up costing them this summer. I figured about 1600 pilots with an average hourly rate of about $55 crediting 15 hours over guarantee a month. I think these numbers are a little conservative. I decided to not try to add per diem or any other contractual pay. The numbers above come out to 1.32 million per month. For June-Aug that is 3.96 million.
If the 80 furloughs were there, I used $38 as a conservative hourly rate because it's second year 700 FO. All 80 would still be on reserve, but possibly over guarantee so I used 85 hours of credit. Again I left per diem and contractual pay out. That number is $258,400 a month or $775,200 for the summer. I realize there are training costs, insurance, etc. that would need to be factored, but that would be a wild guess for me. As far as the numbers I'm using if ASA had not furloughed and kept us on for 12 more months to see what happens with the 20 200s, and remember my numbers are 85 hours of credit for the FOs it would have cost them 3.1 million. That number is still less than what they are going to pay June-Aug. because they furloughed.
I realize that the extra money made by ASA crews this summer is going to be a great help to them and their families. I am happy for all of you for that. However, I do wish that I was still at work as well as the other furloughees. I would also like to stress that this was meant to be a look at ASA's effectiveness in cutting costs. I welcome all of your responses and any input you may have.
Fly Safe,
hemaybedid
If the 80 furloughs were there, I used $38 as a conservative hourly rate because it's second year 700 FO. All 80 would still be on reserve, but possibly over guarantee so I used 85 hours of credit. Again I left per diem and contractual pay out. That number is $258,400 a month or $775,200 for the summer. I realize there are training costs, insurance, etc. that would need to be factored, but that would be a wild guess for me. As far as the numbers I'm using if ASA had not furloughed and kept us on for 12 more months to see what happens with the 20 200s, and remember my numbers are 85 hours of credit for the FOs it would have cost them 3.1 million. That number is still less than what they are going to pay June-Aug. because they furloughed.
I realize that the extra money made by ASA crews this summer is going to be a great help to them and their families. I am happy for all of you for that. However, I do wish that I was still at work as well as the other furloughees. I would also like to stress that this was meant to be a look at ASA's effectiveness in cutting costs. I welcome all of your responses and any input you may have.
Fly Safe,
hemaybedid
If you took the time to go thru all of that, you did figure that you should be in management, right?
I mean, you're trying to save money for them that they are NOT trying to save.
Throw bonuses, good press, stockholder options, golf course deals, and just plain ignorance into the equation and well, there is no equation. It's the American way. Save you time and energy and go to law school. Then become an executive and woo them with your fancy numbers and have one of us (me) fly you around (Rio).
I'll stay there (Rio) as long as you want. Hell, base me there and I won't even tell them that you used to be a pilot. Just give me 72 hours before I have to check in (And no destinations that require de-icing).
New K Now
05-14-2009, 09:24 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: ATR 72 FO
Posts: 140
All 12 ATRs were flying last summer, they started removing 2-3 from service each month until December.
As an ATR pilot who went through training again (minus Basic Indoc) to get transitioned to the CRJ, they have completely refined the process thanks to Jim from the ATR training department taking over the CRJ training department.
Training now consists of two weeks of system lectures which are also combined with FMS training at the end of the day. Also instead of paper tigers, they have replaced that with Graphical Flight Simulator training which is you sitting in front of a mock cockpit that has a big computer screen where all the panels are, and now when you push the button it does something, and you can actually see what is happening when you are doing you flow, etc. You continue with a week of GenOps while also finishing off you GFS training. You also don't get to move on to SIM training until they know you have all your flows down, and have thorough systems knowledge. After that is your typical sim training. The whole process took a month and a half.
As an ATR pilot who went through training again (minus Basic Indoc) to get transitioned to the CRJ, they have completely refined the process thanks to Jim from the ATR training department taking over the CRJ training department.
Training now consists of two weeks of system lectures which are also combined with FMS training at the end of the day. Also instead of paper tigers, they have replaced that with Graphical Flight Simulator training which is you sitting in front of a mock cockpit that has a big computer screen where all the panels are, and now when you push the button it does something, and you can actually see what is happening when you are doing you flow, etc. You continue with a week of GenOps while also finishing off you GFS training. You also don't get to move on to SIM training until they know you have all your flows down, and have thorough systems knowledge. After that is your typical sim training. The whole process took a month and a half.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CAL EWR
Major
21
12-26-2008 08:01 AM
