Originally Posted by
SystemB
I am a professional and I would expect to be treated as such. I also am a staunch union supporter and support enforcement of our CBA. I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. I’m not overlooking anything, but perhaps you are implying that Aviate is bad because it decreases opportunities for our furloughed pilots. We have some contractual provisions for that. More importantly, what makes you think that those UAX carriers owe you a job ahead of anyone else? On my last furlough, I didn’t expect UAL or UAX to find me another job. I did what I had to do. Perhaps I’ll have to do that again. I still don’t think that UAL should or shouldn’t terminate Aviate. It’s purely a business decision to them and it is not part of our CBA.
Respect is earned, I respect those who know the CBA. Especially with respect to language dealing with furloughed UAL pilots filling vacancies at UAX. What you’re supporting is in conflict with your CBA.
I agree that UAL is free to do (most) anything they want in good times. But when UAL pilots are on the street, the Aviate pipeline is 100% unnecessary.
For this claiming Aviate is zero cost, UAL bought a flight school. That’s not zero cost, nor is it critical to the core business.