Originally Posted by
gettinbumped
While I agree that Jumpseat threats are not the way to go, it should be noted that a few years back there was a computer glitch where a few UAL pilots were put ahead of UAX pilots for the Jumpseat on UAX airplanes. For about a month I had to endure constant threats by Skywest pilots that they would not take me until we got it fixed.... Like we had any control over UAL's computer system. There were documents I was presented outlining the threat of no UAL pilots on UAX jumpseats. My standard response was "Dont take me to work, I don't care. But how do you think it's going to go for you when I don't make a trip because I was denied a Jumpseat on an airplane my company paid to have you operate?"
I remember these things.
No offense gettinbumped, but there's a few more things you should remember about that as well. There was A LOT more to that whole thing. It went on for quite some time that UAL pilots were processed ahead of UAX pilots on their own metal, with a fair share of UAL pilots taking full advantage of it. And it was happening on ALL UAX carriers, not jut OO. It was the worst where it's UAL gate agents, the UAX plane is out at the hardstand on a quick turn, the CA may not have time to walk to the gate, and the agent is processing the UAL pilot and not even letting the UAX pilot down to talk to the CA. YES, it happened, repeatedly, hence all the reports to the JS chairs.
For months, the respective UAX JS chairs would inform the UAL JS committee, and NOTHING was being done. The usual response was "it's a glitch in the system, the company says it's too expensive to fix, so we can't do anything about it". In other words, pi$$ off.
AGAIN, this went of for months and months. Then all but one of UAX carriers (at the time) decided to draft the letter you have been shown. Well, wasn't it a freaking coincidence that when that happened, the UAL JS committee actually put pressure on the company to fix the issue? It wasn't about starting a "jumpseat war". It was about going through proper channels and procedures for an extended period of time and constantly banging your head on an wall because the system wasn't being fixed.
There were PLENTY of threads on here about it back then, and PLENTY of UAL pilots that thought it was their god given right to have JS priority on UAX airplanes. These guys also thought that the "tail shouldn't try to wag the dog". It wasn't about that, it was about getting YOUR JS committee to get something fixed that they didn't see as a priority. UAL buys the seats in the back,
but the JS is STILL the respective carrier's, and ANY mainline partner is retarded if they think they own that too. DALALPA tried it a few years back on their DelCon carriers, ehhhh, didn't work out so good for them.
So it sucks that maybe an OO pilot (or any other pilot) "threatened you". And for the record, there's been multiple times when UAX pilots have been denied the JS on mainline metal. You know, those guys that say they don't let RJ guys on their JS. Happened at BOTH the carriers I've worked at. I encourage those guys to tell the CA just what you said above;
"Dont take me to work, I don't care. But how do you think it's going to go for you when I don't make a trip because I was denied a Jumpseat on an airplane with a united paint job on it?"
Now, as far as this whole SA0X or whatever it is. Are all you guys sure that it's NOT a deadheading crew member? UAL will PS one to get them INTO position, as far as DH'ing them BACK to domicile, ehhhhh, UAL doesn't really do that for UAX crew members so much. IOW, the ONLY time it's positive space back to domicile is the LAST flight.