Originally Posted by
Rocketiii
To clarify the last portion of your post; many people with whom I fly laugh at the position of many ual pilots that a more preferable sli will happen for their pilots due to the ratio of widebody to pilots. I believe you even stated in another post how your pilots are more likely to fly a widebody. Of course that's the case if you park a huge narrowbody fleet and furlough 1400. The remaining fleet will obviously make up the statistical majority of aircraft. My point was not to rub a nose or defend one over another. It was to say that both groups have bragging rights and I have no problem with ours highlighting ours. You asked why the rep had to speak publicly. My opinion is that this group is so ****ed off that he wants to show his constituents that he has the same fire in his belly as we do on the line. Many fear that this merger will become an average- lowering our wages and getting some of your scope. I know you guys won't allow that nor will ours. But my feeling on the line is that to bring your average up there will be very little to increase our side afterwards. I understand your frustrations as well. Heck we never had a good contract so it must be miserable to have one then lose it. This is just business in my mind and both groups are proud of what we have or at least once had in the past.
Rocketiii,
Let me preface that I'm not arguing for any SLI position simply because I'm just a line puke and well, my opinion is worth nothing to our negotiators. No UAL pilot, I mean none, have said because we parked the 300's, our SLI position has been increased. The premise regarding the wide body to narrow body pilot ratio at UAL is flawed. Let's say for example UAL has two 400s and two 300's. The 400 has 20 pilots and so does the 300. The top 20 pilots are on the 400 and the bottom 20 are slinging it out on the guppy but waiting for their god given right to fly the 400. Then Fletcher Tilton parks one guppy. Nothing has changed for the 10 guppy guys, or gals left? They are still in the same progress line for the 400. Just because we have a larger percentage of wide bodies to narrow doesn't mean the narrow body folks are going to get there quicker because fletcher parked a guppy. Therefore, the supposed wide/narrow ratio body argument on the current UAL property is flawed, and is probably why I have never heard that. There might be other opinions here at UAL but, Jesus knows I'm not making an argument for or against any.
Regarding the lowering of your average wage increase and buying scope, I understand your concern. All I can say is that most of the pilots I'm flying with aren't in the mood for buying anything. Remember we lost almost 50%, plus everything else. That my friend, is a lot of average to recover. We intend to get what is due to us and you.
Best of luck to both of us and I do look forward to our future.
Fritz