American Airlines Cuts 200 Pilot Jobs

[Mach85ER]

The proposal also calls for an increase in the monthly maximum up to 82 hours. In addition, it would enable management to increase the monthly maximum up to 95 hours “in the event the Company experiences greater than forecast attrition beyond the number of pilots who accept the FMSP.â€￾ Bear in mind that increasing monthly maximums would generally be inconsistent with the goal of mitigating furloughs.

.â€￾


If a pilot works 87 hours a month - I know that they put in more doing pre-flights - sitting on the ground etc...how many hours on the job does 87 flying hours equate to?

Just curious not trying to make any point...

Last year, I was fairly senior in a large bid status at a major base. With the current 78 hour max scheduling, I'd averaged about 55-60 hours a week away from home (non-commuter). This also includes overnight and hotel time. Some might think "ahhh, vacation time" , but 99% of the time I am usually dead tired, and it's pick up time before finally feeling good.

I've done 87-90 due to repeated trips that fly through into a new month and add on top of the 78. After about 2 months of that, fatigue sets in both on and off duty. With that comes mistakes inflight, and I've found the rate goes up exponetially.

That time also includes radical body clock changes too. Monday morning it's up until 4:00 am, Tuesday morning the wakeup time in 2:30 am.

Hope this helps.

 

[Winglet]

If the membership were offered the proposed early out provision, there would definitely be zero furloughs. Might even be able to get some more guys brought in from furlough faster.

There is nothing to prevent them from retiring anytime they want . . . . .and they are. The proposed early retirement scheme by the company is not attractive because it allows the company to decide when you will retire, which could cause you to lose money in your retirement B-Fund with the stock market in general decline. Some of that might be offset by the 4.5 month bonus, but remember that's taxable so you have to subtract probably 25% for taxes. Since a retiree would likely be damaged in his B-fund and lose control over when he could retire, I doubt if there would be any takers. Given the mandatory and onerous provisions of gutted work rules, weakening of scope provisions, and absolutely no provable guarantees that a furlough would not occur anyway, this whole package is a sham. The company knows it and the APA knows it.

I was interested, however, how you know that it would result in zero furloughs? What's to keep the company from deciding to furlough in Nov and just say, "Oh, conditions have changed and we now need to furlough 400?" Answer: NOTHING. APA Recourse: NONE

Result assuming they could find 200 senior pilots gullible enough to take the deal:

1. 200 senior pilots get a couple months extra pay, but are indentured servants until the company releases them. Probability of losing tens of thousands of dollars in the B-Fund by not being able to control retirement date.
2. Absolutely no guarantees whatsoever on future furloughs.
3. Every working pilot at AA would be forced to work 83-87 and perhaps as much as 95 hours per month. This dramatic increase in work hours would result in more work days per month, more time away from families, and probably result in furloughing at least 500 more pilots.
4. Lower the trigger on the commuter clause on the contract AA has with the APA. This would significantly weaken scope.
5. All of this would also establish a new status quo as a basis for future contract negotiations.

Everything in this sham is a bonus for AA and detrimental to 99% of line and furloughed pilots. And that is why it is being binned with contempt.

Oh, and BTW, the 200 furlough is not certain, regardless this proposal. It's only a possibility at this point.

 

[AirLUVer]

...Given the mandatory and onerous provisions of gutted work rules, weakening of scope provisions, and absolutely no provable guarantees that a furlough would not occur anyway, this whole package is a sham. The company knows it and the APA knows it.
I was interested, however, how you know that it would result in zero furloughs? What's to keep the company from deciding to furlough in Nov and just say, "Oh, conditions have changed and we now need to furlough 400?" Answer: NOTHING. APA Recourse: NONE
Result assuming they could find 200 senior pilots gullible enough to take the deal:
1. 200 senior pilots get a couple months extra pay, but are indentured servants until the company releases them. Probability of losing tens of thousands of dollars in the B-Fund by not being able to control retirement date.
2. Absolutely no guarantees whatsoever on future furloughs.
3. Every working pilot at AA would be forced to work 83-87 and perhaps as much as 95 hours per month. This dramatic increase in work hours would result in more work days per month, more time away from families, and probably result in furloughing at least 500 more pilots.
4. Lower the trigger on the commuter clause on the contract AA has with the APA. This would significantly weaken scope.
5. All of this would also establish a new status quo as a basis for future contract negotiations.
Everything in this sham is a bonus for AA and detrimental to 99% of line and furloughed pilots. And that is why it is being binned with contempt.
Oh, and BTW, the 200 furlough is not certain, regardless this proposal. It's only a possibility at this point.

No one is forced to schedule a 83-95 hour month, except for the reserves who are already working an 85 hour month. Some pilots may pick up the extra hours, many/most will not.
1. B-Fund, ~$50,000.00 should make up for a loss of tens of thousands of dollars. Calculating 78 hour month times 4.5, and multiplying by a modest $180/Hour rate.
2. Completely agree with, there are no guarantees of further downsizing in the future.
3. Only reserves will be forced to work the higher times, except for those that are re-assigned or answer the phone when the caller id says AMR Corp.
4. Sorry, in this lovely economic environment, some scope relief would be nice to allow AA to compete effectively with those carriers allowed to right size the equipement to the market. When only 80-100 seats are needed, the smallest jet AA can offer is 140.
5. This is a side letter agreement, not a true change to the contract. The Delhi provision has not been extendable to other routes i.e. DFW-PEK. So your argument that it would establish a status quo is a red herring.

Sorry for not being clearer, but I meant no furloughs from this WARN letter. If AA decided in November to furlough more, there would have to be an additional WARN letter issued.

There are going to be many training issues this fall and spring with closing of fleets, adding new 737's. Moving pilots to other equipment will inherently boost the number of required pilots working at AA.

 

[Winglet]

No one is forced to schedule a 83-95 hour month, except for the reserves who are already working an 85 hour month. Some pilots may pick up the extra hours, many/most will not.
1. B-Fund, ~$50,000.00 should make up for a loss of tens of thousands of dollars. Calculating 78 hour month times 4.5, and multiplying by a modest $180/Hour rate.
2. Completely agree with, there are no guarantees of further downsizing in the future.
3. Only reserves will be forced to work the higher times, except for those that are re-assigned or answer the phone when the caller id says AMR Corp.
4. Sorry, in this lovely economic environment, some scope relief would be nice to allow AA to compete effectively with those carriers allowed to right size the equipement to the market. When only 80-100 seats are needed, the smallest jet AA can offer is 140.
5. This is a side letter agreement, not a true change to the contract. The Delhi provision has not been extendable to other routes i.e. DFW-PEK. So your argument that it would establish a status quo is a red herring.

Sorry for not being clearer, but I meant no furloughs from this WARN letter. If AA decided in November to furlough more, there would have to be an additional WARN letter issued.

There are going to be many training issues this fall and spring with closing of fleets, adding new 737's. Moving pilots to other equipment will inherently boost the number of required pilots working at AA.

If the lines are 83 hours, then you are forced to work it. The company already has 85 hours max. That's enough, especially since you say that it's not needed. I guess another reason it's not needed is that they want a permanent 83 hour max, 95 flex with no end date to fix what you say is a temporary training bubble.

Oh, and you say that this agreement, plus giving away scope and outsourcing 75+ seat aircraft will result in MORE AA pilots being recalled?? AA can have all the 80-100 seat aircraft it wants. There is no restriction.

Letting the company dictate your retirement date for a not-likely break even on money (by the time taxes are paid on it), doesn't sound like a good deal to me. Retiring pilots could take stand-in-stead furloughs and still retain their right to retire when they want with a B-fund lock-in date of their choosing.

Glad to see that you agree that this proposal does nothing to prevent furloughs.

The Delhi letter is very narrow in scope for a very specific purpose. This LOA is very broad in scope and a change to the defacto status quo with a permanent changes (for a temp problem) in monthly max and flex as well as permanently changing the trigger point that would likely force the dissolving of Eagle. The 95 hour flex is so nebulously worded as allow the company to invoke it at will. When looked at with a critical eye, one could easily come to the conclusion that this is a Trojan Horse.

Nevertheless, I am sure that the leadership team of the APA will give the proposal carefully consideration after looking at all the unseen angles and past company negotiating practices, and issue an appropriate response or counter with one that meets the true needs of the company in the form of a temporary solution to a temporary problem.

 

[AirLUVer]

Just because the line is built at 83 hours does not mean you have to work the 83 hour month. Drop the trips you don't want to work to a pilot that does. Bid military and don't pick up trips to make up for what is dropped. There are numerous ways to get around working what the lines are built for. Most lines are built for less than the monthly max ~72 hours with the monthly max set at 78 hours.

I didn't say that easing up on scope would result in more AA pilots being recalled. But Delta and NW are having fewer furloughs with their relaxed scope clauses than AA. I believe DL was actually hiring off of the street in the last 5 years, while AA still has pilots on furlough from 2001.

 

[Mach85ER]

Just because the line is built at 83 hours does not mean you have to work the 83 hour month. Drop the trips you don't want to work to a pilot that does. Bid military and don't pick up trips to make up for what is dropped. There are numerous ways to get around working what the lines are built for. Most lines are built for less than the monthly max ~72 hours with the monthly max set at 78 hours.

I didn't say that easing up on scope would result in more AA pilots being recalled. But Delta and NW are having fewer furloughs with their relaxed scope clauses than AA. I believe DL was actually hiring off of the street in the last 5 years, while AA still has pilots on furlough from 2001.

AirLUVer,

I don't know where to start with your last 2 posts. They are so wrong when it comes to AA, you might as well have been discussing Pakistani cricket team stats, they would have been more related to the AA pilots than what you posted.

good luck

 

[Winglet]

Delta didn't buy a a 3000 pilot airline, spend a billion dollars integrating it, then get rid of the planes and furlough the pilots and flight attendants, either. Also, Delta has figured out that RJs are money burners and is dumping them quick. Delta's present management team is looking ahead, expanding international operations significantly, not looking back, and is being moderately successful in rebuilding trust with it's employee groups.

AA did have 100 seat airplanes, both Folkers and the 717s from TWA. They got rid of them. Today, AA can buy and operate as many E-190s as they want. No problem. Conveniently, there's even an existing comparable pay scale, so I'd bet AA could have a signed deal in about an hour.

I'll be real interesting to see what happens when the commuter clause trigger is reached, and maybe very soon. That will make the outsourcing of AA flying a moot point.