Nucflash

A lot of this will come down to who has other things going on in their lives. Sadly, even at these advanced stages of middle age, many don’t know what to do with themselves except go to work and fly trips.

DashTrash

Forgive my optimism, but I think there’s a good possibility that 500-600 take it. The paid move with the Company paying the imputed income tax is huge. You’re not limited to moving close to a base either. You could choose to get a paid move to Florida, Arizona, or any other retirement destination.

Bluewaffle

Most of the complaining I’m hearing is not being old enough to qualify. I imagine they get 1100 easy.

LeeFXDWG

At 57, I’d be gone.

MasterOfPuppets

Someone on the other site put up a spreadsheet of where the 63+ are based and the seats they hold. I think you can count the NB FOs gone. I also think you can count on a lot of 787 CAs going as the quality of flying has deteriorated. The 777 guys may hang on because they can sit around and do nothing while getting gurantee. 756 pilots I think are gone especially the ones that just camped on the 764.

im still sticking with 700, but I won’t be surprised if it goes north of that.

I think the company will award the 62 out to all 777/756/320 pilots that want it. I don’t think any 787/737 CAs will be awarded at 62. I do think 787/737 FOs will be awarded to all that ask.

Thor

For those *****ing about “why not 57, or 60” I’m sure you know this, but it’s the money.

As an example using WB CA pay:

($351*58)*12 = $244,296

If you use that number and apply it to 57, and 60

8 & 5 years til retirement produces:

57 would gross $1.9M
60 would gross $1.2M
62 will gross $732,888

At some point the the economy recovers and we remember we’re in section 6. If I were the company I’d point at the 8 year early our numbers and cry poor.

If the assumption is take the early out at 57 and only get the 58 hours for 36 months (same as the 62 year old) would you really want income to stop 5 years before you can draw retirement?

if the current LOA ends up fully subscribed, then in the long term everyone benefits. If it’s not fully subscribed, it would be nice to see the ability to offer it to progressively younger pilots. But, it’s the LOA we’ve got.

MasterOfPuppets

good post.

all they have to do is next summer re-offer to those 63+. There will be a whole nother batch in that age group and a whole nother batch at 62.

horrido27

Guys and Gals... maybe someone can point me to what I'm missing with regards to this EO.
It only targets 1100ish pilots.
Of those, roughly 711ish are 63 and over.
Of which it excluded anyone out on LTD... so what are the target numbers now?

It was my understanding that PC or BQ mentioned (somewhere) that retirements for the next year were already factored into the Furlough numbers.
So, even if half those directly eligible (350ish) take it and another 50% of the 62 crowd take it (200ish), I don't believe it will save even one furlough?!
What am I missing?

Some believe 1000+ will take the EO and that will save 1000 furloughees... but I just don't see it?

Why would anyone who has 7 weeks vacation a year AND even if their sick back is Zero, they would still earn 60 hrs in that year which is like another 2.5 weeks.. why would they accept the offer as is UNLESS they had a side gig and/or military retirement? If they have a couple of hundred hours of sick leave.. even less of a chance they would take it.

In my honest opinion, this is a fail not because of what was agreed upon, it's a fail because our union should have been vocal (In Public) against management early on for NOT wanting to negotiate an early out. How is it that our Fellow ALPA Brothers & Sisters at Delta got a deal that has a larger pool of eligibility and (seems) to be aimed at reducing furloughs and ours is aimed at "many older pilots place a high value on free time and are ready to step back from flying". That being less than 10% of our pilot group?

A true EO that is aimed at reducing Furloughs would have mirrored Delta's target audience. -
Age 50 + 10 years of Service, or
25 years of Service

Hell, even if they had allowed 60 and above to apply, it might have helped.

At the end of the day, I expect that less than 400 will actually take it. Will also be great to know the difference between the Legacy Groups..
It is what it is.. but still can't figure out why people are typing it's a great deal or that it will save jobs.

Always
Motch

Deathray

I think they should have restricted it to those aged 59-62. Anyone older than that will retire anyways within the next 3 years. By targeting those next three years, you’d capture a larger group in the aggregate without stagnating those junior.

TFAYD

the early out will not reduce a single furlough. And I guess it wasn’t designed that way because it would cost money.