Furlough estimate
04-30-2020, 04:06 AM
#131
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Here is the latest rumor on the NPDM and fallout.
1500-2000 furloughs in waves of 500.
CLE base closing.
Categories to close:
CLE 737
ORD 777
ORD 756
IAH 777
IAH 756
DEN 787
DEN 756
SFO 756
LAX 756
LAX 320
A big realignment is in motion. Town Hall meeting for employees with Oscar/Scott on May 1st, hopefully they can confirm the numbers.
1500-2000 furloughs in waves of 500.
CLE base closing.
Categories to close:
CLE 737
ORD 777
ORD 756
IAH 777
IAH 756
DEN 787
DEN 756
SFO 756
LAX 756
LAX 320
A big realignment is in motion. Town Hall meeting for employees with Oscar/Scott on May 1st, hopefully they can confirm the numbers.
However, the furloughs in waves of 500 makes absolutely no sense. UAL could easily furlough 500 on Oct 1, for example, but after that as displacements and training occur there is no financial reason for UAL to wait until they have nice round numbers for the next round. If they think they are fat pilots they will not hesitate to furlough on a monthly basis.
04-30-2020, 04:37 AM
#132
New Hire
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 9
From the look of things, the 756 owns the Europe routes from the east coast hubs and that's about it. Looks like it survives until at least the 321XLR shows up. The 777 is pushed to the coasts for the heavier traveled long haul routes and (maybe) premium transcons. Is the mid-continent hub strategy dead with the removal of all international flying but ORD/IAH 787? The cuts are in some very senior categories. Would be nice to see some kind of (palatable) early retirement offered.
1500-2000 for this NPDM. Any theories what happens after that? When's the next NPDM and how deep will those cuts be?
1500-2000 for this NPDM. Any theories what happens after that? When's the next NPDM and how deep will those cuts be?
Having lived through the furlough days twice, although I was never furloughed, they will furlough until they have the "ah ha" moment that they've gone too far and need to stop or reverse the process. They'll have a ballpark figure based on their plan and projections, but we'll never know the exact number or who will be "The Ball" until the music stops.
There are many wildcards in this downward spiral and it's near impossible to be clairvoyant. It will be painful for all to varying degrees. The economy and passenger bookings / demand is key. If the passengers don't come back to the level they've planned for, the cuts will continue beyond the 1500-2000 furloughs that are "expected / rumored" at this point. How many more? See the clairvoyant comment above.
Then there's the ALPA and the UPA. Are we going to "help". After learning this lesson before it is easier to know the correct answer. DO NOT GIVE CONCESSIONS. If the company is going to go Chapter 11, you can work for free and it will not prevent them from doing it. They will rape us. In fact, the company still needs several BILLION dollars in cash to be able to enter the Chapter 1113 process.
The answer MUST BE something like..."Yep, Oscar and Scott, you were happy with our current UPA for the past 2 years. We are happy with it too, goodbye. Call us if you need us in front of the judge."
Personally, I'd rather give only once in front of the judge instead of "helping" now and having the judge take away more in Round 2.
Stay strong
04-30-2020, 04:55 AM
#134
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: .
Posts: 348
That story has already been told. If the leadership has an ounce of sense, they know that doesn’t bode well for the company.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
04-30-2020, 06:04 AM
#136
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: Airbus 320 Captain
Posts: 481
That has NOT been the mantra of the current management team; in the past they've publicly stated quite the opposite, that shrinking to profitability doesn't work. They further have said on record that United needed to gain back it's "fair share" of the market that had been squandered away by previous management. Further, their actions up until the Covid crisis were the opposite of "shrink to profitability". "If"/when they furlough, it's to stop the hemorrhaging of cash. There's an old saying.. if you're out hunting and being chased by a bear, you don't have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than the slowest hunter in the group.
04-30-2020, 06:12 AM
#137
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
That has NOT been the mantra of the current management team; in the past they've publicly stated quite the opposite, that shrinking to profitability doesn't work. They further have said on record that United needed to gain back it's "fair share" of the market that had been squandered away by previous management. Further, their actions up until the Covid crisis were the opposite of "shrink to profitability". "If"/when they furlough, it's to stop the hemorrhaging of cash. There's an old saying.. if you're out hunting and being chased by a bear, you don't have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than the slowest hunter in the group.
04-30-2020, 06:20 AM
#138
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Posts: 181
04-30-2020, 06:30 AM
#139
Pilot Response
Joined APC: May 2011
Position: A320 Captain
Posts: 479
This Speculation is Harmful. Please Stop.
Everyone, Respectfully,
This continuous uninformed, opinionated rumor mongering is irresponsible and not helpful. This speculation serves no real purpose; will everyone please stop. We all have an inalienable right to free speech and to our own opinion, but please think about what harm to others you could be causing by spreading unofficial, speculative rumors; however accurate they might turn out to be. You do not know the facts right now.
Please balance your need to "scoop" someone on a forum or be the smartest in the class with the impact your rumor might have on someone new or junior. Ask yourself, "How does this rumor really help (someone else)".
It doesn't matter how many times you state that this is "just my opinion" or "I could be wrong...", it doesn't really diminish the quantity of bad information. The impact on people and the decisions that will soon have to be made are critical and long-term; by filling the vacuum with falsehood, that decision process starts from a flawed beginning. Some people who read this forum ascribe far more credibility than deserved to things on here.
When definitive information finally comes from the company or ALPA, then speculations, past practices(sadly) and opinions with the facts can be, and have been, very helpful.
There were horrible personal outcomes for some in the last two industry downturns. Please don't fan any fires. "First, do no harm"
Again, respectfully.
This continuous uninformed, opinionated rumor mongering is irresponsible and not helpful. This speculation serves no real purpose; will everyone please stop. We all have an inalienable right to free speech and to our own opinion, but please think about what harm to others you could be causing by spreading unofficial, speculative rumors; however accurate they might turn out to be. You do not know the facts right now.
Please balance your need to "scoop" someone on a forum or be the smartest in the class with the impact your rumor might have on someone new or junior. Ask yourself, "How does this rumor really help (someone else)".
It doesn't matter how many times you state that this is "just my opinion" or "I could be wrong...", it doesn't really diminish the quantity of bad information. The impact on people and the decisions that will soon have to be made are critical and long-term; by filling the vacuum with falsehood, that decision process starts from a flawed beginning. Some people who read this forum ascribe far more credibility than deserved to things on here.
When definitive information finally comes from the company or ALPA, then speculations, past practices(sadly) and opinions with the facts can be, and have been, very helpful.
There were horrible personal outcomes for some in the last two industry downturns. Please don't fan any fires. "First, do no harm"
Again, respectfully.
04-30-2020, 07:07 AM
#140
Banned
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 540
Lets say your first mark for manpower is next summer. Between Apr1, 2020 and Jul31, 2021 we will have 600 retirements, so without any additional offerings at least that many will retire by then. So, you will go from approximately 13500 down to 12900 with just that. If you wanted to be 15% smaller across the board by next summer you would be looking at a total need of 1425 furloughs. If you wanted to furlough as much as you could starting on Oct 1, you would have several areas of potential problems that you would have to be able to handle staffing wise.
The bottom 1425 represent the following percentages of the current BES followed by how many pilots would have to be displaced from elsewhere and trained into that position to have it staffed at 85% of the current size:
DCA 320 FO - 46% = 36 new pilots needed
DCA 737 FO - 27% = 27 new pilots needed
DEN 320 FO - 19% = 7 new pilots needed
DEN 737 FO - 25% = 26 new pilots needed
DEN 756 FO - 19% = 3 new pilots needed
EWR 320 FO - 59% = 113 new pilots needed
EWR 737 FO 37% = 88 new pilots needed
EWR 756 FO 26% = 56 new pilots needed
IAH 737 FO 21% = 25 new pilots needed
LAX 320 FO 61% = 23 new pilots needed
LAX 737 FO 44% = 59 new pilots needed
LAX 756 FO 55% = 34 new pilots needed
ORD 320 FO 18% = 6 new pilots needed
ORD 737 FO 23% = 18 new pilots needed
SFO 320 FO 72% = 118 new pilots needed
SFO 737 FO 53% = 91 new pilots needed
SFO 756 FO 62% = 49 new pilots needed
To be able to furlough everyone you would have about 800ish training events needed to get new people into these seats. Obviously the cuts would not be straight across the board, but if you want to be 15% smaller by next summer that is a pretty good approximation of what it would take. If you want to be even smaller then the training events start going up dramatically as you get the daisy chain of bump/training/bump/training going from higher seats as retirements alone would not provide the needed movement in the CA seat!
Even with a 15% reduction It is virtually impossible to do 800 transitions by Oct 1. The problem for us becomes what if you want to be 40% smaller on Oct 1 and work your way up to being only 15% smaller by June 1. Then you would only need about 225 transitions by Oct 1 and the remaining 500+ could be done over the Fall, Winter and Spring. Doing over 200 transitions by Oct 1, would be difficult, but possible.
So, the driving force is how much smaller of an airline are they planning for Oct. A small size in October unfortunately would allow a large furlough.
The bottom 1425 represent the following percentages of the current BES followed by how many pilots would have to be displaced from elsewhere and trained into that position to have it staffed at 85% of the current size:
DCA 320 FO - 46% = 36 new pilots needed
DCA 737 FO - 27% = 27 new pilots needed
DEN 320 FO - 19% = 7 new pilots needed
DEN 737 FO - 25% = 26 new pilots needed
DEN 756 FO - 19% = 3 new pilots needed
EWR 320 FO - 59% = 113 new pilots needed
EWR 737 FO 37% = 88 new pilots needed
EWR 756 FO 26% = 56 new pilots needed
IAH 737 FO 21% = 25 new pilots needed
LAX 320 FO 61% = 23 new pilots needed
LAX 737 FO 44% = 59 new pilots needed
LAX 756 FO 55% = 34 new pilots needed
ORD 320 FO 18% = 6 new pilots needed
ORD 737 FO 23% = 18 new pilots needed
SFO 320 FO 72% = 118 new pilots needed
SFO 737 FO 53% = 91 new pilots needed
SFO 756 FO 62% = 49 new pilots needed
To be able to furlough everyone you would have about 800ish training events needed to get new people into these seats. Obviously the cuts would not be straight across the board, but if you want to be 15% smaller by next summer that is a pretty good approximation of what it would take. If you want to be even smaller then the training events start going up dramatically as you get the daisy chain of bump/training/bump/training going from higher seats as retirements alone would not provide the needed movement in the CA seat!
Even with a 15% reduction It is virtually impossible to do 800 transitions by Oct 1. The problem for us becomes what if you want to be 40% smaller on Oct 1 and work your way up to being only 15% smaller by June 1. Then you would only need about 225 transitions by Oct 1 and the remaining 500+ could be done over the Fall, Winter and Spring. Doing over 200 transitions by Oct 1, would be difficult, but possible.
So, the driving force is how much smaller of an airline are they planning for Oct. A small size in October unfortunately would allow a large furlough.
I like your approach as it’s a starting point equation vice rampant emotion based speculation. With the equation in mind did you account for the full or partial parking of fleets?
I think fleet reductions would would drop the training events proportional with expected manning per seat BES wise.
cheers,
Biff
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
