Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: lump sum/pilot shortage

  1. #1
    Registered User NoOtPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,045
    Level
    100
    Points: 73,395, Level: 100
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    DownloadsPosting Award
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 137/37
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

    lump sum/pilot shortage


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Dan Herring, director of American?s crew resources department, had other factoids as he made American?s case that keeping the lump-sum option would lead to many retirements after American emerged from bankruptcy.

    American has to train pilots to replace retiring pilots. ?Due to this ?chain reaction? effect,

    each senior pilot retirement drives an average of 3.5 to 4 training events, as pilot

    positions are backfilled and ultimately new pilot(s) are hired and trained.?

    American has 7,510 active pilots covered by the A Plan. Herring, in the non-redacted parts of his statement, said he studied the impact of 2,200, 2,700 or 3,300 pilots retiring. That?s nearly three in 10 pilots minimum, to a maximum of more than four in 10 pilots.

    American has decided not to hire more reserve pilots because ?it would be prohibitively expensive, at a cost of about $250,000 per year in salary and benefits per active pilot.?

    We have the issue of a potential merger with US Airways. Without mentioning that airline, Scott Hansen, American?s director flight administration, stated that a merger ?would not prevent the pilot replacement problem in the event of mass pilot retirements.?

    ?Using the active pilots from the merging airline to replace retiring American pilots would cause operational challenges at the merging carrier. This would also cause the same ?cascade effect? at the merging carrier as if the replacement came directly from American ? i.e., active pilots from the merging airline would need to be backfilled by more junior pilots at the merging airline, who would in turn need to be backfilled. Thus, a merger would not improve American?s ability to replace retiring pilots in this case.

    ?Pilots are trained on a specific equipment type and operating certificate. A pilot from a merging carrier would not be able to fly American aircraft without going through the same extensive training that would be required for an existing American pilot to be trained on a new equipment type. This would be true even if the pilot flew the same type of aircraft at the other carrier.

    ?When airlines merge, the carriers typically consolidate under a single operating certificate. In this case, if American were to merge with another airline, pilots from the merging carrier would need to undergo the same extensive training to become qualified on American?s equipment as would be required for a new pilot joining American.

    ?Airline mergers also generally require integration of airline seniority lists, harmonization of seniority rules, and, in many cases, integration of fleets. These integrations typically result in an additional increase in training requirements to get pilots to the appropriate aircraft based on their new relative seniority, and may even drive additional pilot attrition.

    ?A merger between American and another airline would do nothing to reduce the incentives for an American pilot to retire when eligible. As discussed above, mergers often require difficult integration of seniority lists, which can result in senior pilots losing their relative seniority position to pilots from the merging carrier. If their relative seniority position changes, American pilots may have an incentive to retire in advance of a merger, as the change may require a relocation or a change in equipment type.

    ?In the event of a merger, pilots would still face reductions in continuing benefits and pay relative to their pre-Chapter 11 employment arrangement, and the economic decision for a retirement-eligible pilot would be similar whether American has a merger partner or not.?

    Christopher Broom, American?s managing director of flight training, filed a declaration explaining why American doesn?t have the training capability to handle a large number of retirements:

    ?American cannot significantly expand its training capacity above this level in the near term. As described above, recruiting and training new check airmen would take more than six months, and availability of third-party simulator capacity is severely limited. Buying enough new simulators and finding building space for the additional simulations could take 18-24 months. In addition, ninety-five percent of American?s check airmen themselves are or will be eligible to retire by March 1, 2013, likely exacerbating American?s training constraints. Training individuals from the ranks of the active pilots to become check airmen further exacerbates the capacity situation, as replacements for those pilots wou
    ld need to be trained as well.?

    Nov 26 2012

  2. #2
    Registered User NoOtPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,045
    Level
    100
    Points: 73,395, Level: 100
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    DownloadsPosting Award
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 137/37
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

  3. #3
    Registered User Stickshaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    135
    Level
    53
    Points: 6,609, Level: 53
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 20/9
    Given: 60/5

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    The thing that worries me is they just can't train the flowbers fast enough.

  4. #4
    Registered User downwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    353
    Level
    46
    Points: 5,234, Level: 46
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 55/6
    Given: 1/3

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Merging usair and aa will be ugly beyond ugly. Usair still can't get its own house in order. Its east vs. west over there. Imagine the the merger between these hatefilled groups. America west vs usair vs aa vs twa vs reno vs those f-in eagle pilots.

  5. #5
    Registered User ardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    4,919
    Level
    99
    Points: 29,862, Level: 99
    Overall activity: 20.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 570/36
    Given: 589/14

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    A management dream, work groups against each other.

  6. #6
    Registered User Divine Wind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Job
    CA
    A/C Flown
    EMB
    Posts
    1,138
    Level
    66
    Points: 9,694, Level: 66
    Overall activity: 99.7%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 202/5
    Given: 132/2

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by downwind View Post
    Merging usair and aa will be ugly beyond ugly. Usair still can't get its own house in order. Its east vs. west over there. Imagine the the merger between these hatefilled groups. America west vs usair vs aa vs twa vs reno vs those f-in eagle pilots.
    Ugly, perhaps, but I think USAirways is hoping an AA merger would break their Eastie foot-dragging.

    USAirways has 5200 pilots, of which roughly half are each Eastie and Westie. An AA merger, with it's pre-agreed upon APA contract, would not only bring in a group outnumbering USAirways pilots 2-1 (and, more specifically, the Eastie pilots by 4-1), but would, IMO, force a merger reboot under the McCaskil-Bond Amendment.

    http://afaonevoice.org/images/McCask...0for%20WEB.pdf


    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...ssurances.html
    Management at Tempe, Ariz.-based US Airways says the deal offers its pilots ? currently among the lowest-paid in the industry ? a chance at as much as an immediate 40 percent raise.

    ?There?s an awful lot in it for our pilots,? said US Airways president Scott Kirby. ?Hopefully, because of that, we?ll get to the point where we find something they?ll enthusiastically support.?

    But the U.S. Airline Pilots Association is seeking protections, such as a guarantee that its pilots won?t be stuck flying smaller, regional jets, which pay less. About twice as many pilots work for American Airlines as US Airways.

  7. #7
    Newbie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    5
    Level
    16
    Points: 916, Level: 16
    Overall activity: 41.7%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    What AA doesn't say is that they hired and trained 100 pilots per month during mid to late 80's, they can ramp up to cover any retirements, they just don't want to do it, or pay lump sum. i.e. they have ability to transistion approxs 16-18 777 per month, they're doing 2-3.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •