Originally Posted by
Zenofzin
We are trying to fill planes and connect to mainline with the high yield passengers, it’s our union blocking the company from selling more seats. Our scope love it or not ultimately affects our profitability. I’m not advocating selling out, but I do know out of a lot of cities we have lost global service and higher paying customers do to our inferior 50 seat product. That’s life. I personally would be fine with replacing more 50 seaters with 70 seats at the regional level. I think we are cutting our own necks. The same guys that beeyatch about DAL profit sharing don’t seem open minded to any changes that might increase our profitability. Yes single engine taxi helps and when even employees like myself BUY tickets for their families rather then use the UAL discount because you have to travel on a crap 50 seat RJ THERE IS AN ISSUE. I hope our union knows what it’s doing
Well let’s see, we have a fairly similar scope as Deltas, not exactly comparable but close enough. What’s different then? Could it be all those 100 seat 717s and the new A220s they’re adding and flying into markets we fly ratty gross smelly sweaty 50 seaters? Is ALPA preventing mgmt from adding a NSNB to our fleet in anyway?
Guess what else Delta does, JV out a YUGE portion of their top end widebody flying. Look at the number of top tier pay CA/FO seats at UAL vs DAL.
Stop pointing the finger at your breatheren and your union, they’re trying to put the genie back in the bottle and improve YOUR pay, QOL, benefits, travel, etc. Concessionist attitudes don’t help, especially for the guys on the bottom of the list. Unless you’re only worried about you.