Once someone is infected with the doomer mindset, it is difficult for them to see the world any other way. I think you explained it perfectly; this is an example of a reception/comprehension problem, not an articulation/transmission issue.

hes not a doomer, he’s just a mainline pilot that hopes to see the 50 seaters go away.

I didn’t intend to even imply that you are an idiot, or anything close. I was just posting the exact quote and an open ended statement that people should not hang their hopes on what the meaning of “is” is. You are absolutely correct, no one knows for certain how this will play out, but Scott Kirby was pretty clear about the likely future of 50 seat flying. He was also clear about the future of the 756 fleet, and possibly the Airbus fleet, if we have a slow recovery. The video was a little bit of dark humor, well because it is a funny clip and despite what Kirby said, there’s a chance.

I call B.S. on Kirby.
What company, concerned about solvency, would pay to replace old working aircraft with non-existent new ones?
Who's with me?

There is some truth to that, but what I’m really more interested in is the how it happens. I’m all for eliminating the 50 seat flying and creating higher paying jobs at United, but I also understand that there are a bunch of 50 seaters out there and just a few ways to make the change happen. The United MEC is arguing to bring the UAL owned 175’s in-house. That would satisfy the new SNB requirement of the contract and allow more regional 175’s. I don’t know if that is something that will work when you do the math or not, but it makes for an interesting discussion. I’m not a doomer, and I don’t wish any pilot harm, but big changes in how things have been done are happening and I find that interesting.

+1000. Especially ones with the lowest trip costs for many of the government mandated routes that are the strings for the gobs of free money coming from DC.

It’s called a C-suite power play and negotiating. Never let a crisis go to waste to get something for nothing that you couldn’t get on your terms before. Kirby wants gobs of big RJs and scope for no cost ... and now he is pitching it as a way to help UAL survive. Trust the UAL MEC to hold the line ... they know the last time they caved it helped make the lost decade an actual decade.

I don’t know if the discussion at the upper levels was about replacing aircraft or about the actual need for a fleet. Coming out of this old working aircraft like the 757 or 145 may no longer make sense to them.

LOL, very true.

KP is one of the biggest salesmen at the school.

I watched the UND presentation. No way did they say recovery by Fall. They must have said a dozen times that nobody knows when the recovery would take place, but that historically the industry has always recovered eventually.

Edit to add: YouTube link of that presentation

Agreed. This is what I’ve been thinking. In a tough economy with low margins and no cash on hand I don’t see any way that they could pay for expensive new airplanes more economically than running the aircraft that we have.
Secondly, as our management has said, we still have a strong and extendable contract with United for several years yet. They can’t break the contract without going to court.

Sure they can. Google “force majeure”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They’d still have to go to court. I agree they could make a good argument, but force majeure has to be accompanied by some other aspect, like UAL being unable to make payments. So far they have cash on hand, the bailout and an unknown future. A court would apply bankruptcy-like standards that would require a clear cut hardship in payment. Not saying it’s not possible, but a court would decide.

l really don’t think that Kirby was saying that 50 seat flying will be a thing of the past by this weekend, but by the end of the recovery. If United files chapter 11, then all bets are off, but outside of that I’d say that they have to honor a contract. Couldn’t they use the 50 seat fleet during the recovery and then refuse to renew or extend the various contracts as they came due? You can’t get rid of 300 airplanes in the UAX system overnight, but using them during the recovery until their contracts expire could be their plan.

I agree. He was basically like, I think when this is all said and done 50 seat flying will almost all be gone. And fair enough. Of course when is this all said and done? God only knows.

In some sense he could be saying, when we are out of this, I'd like to not have 50 seat flying if I can.

Or he could be saying nothing. Isn't knowing nothing so fun?? 🙃🙃🙃

You guys are starting to sound like the Compass board 6 months ago, grasping at any possible positive interpretation of a pretty black and white statement.

true that. It’s really quite funny.

I do wonder how some of those contracts read. If United makes a deal with a regional to cover a certain amount of flying, what happens when that flying goes away like it has now? What happens if the need to furlough comes up and flying is reduced for an extended period of time? What happens if the market no longer supports some of the routes? Can United decide to retire any aircraft that they own regardless if it is a 145 or a 777? It’s going to be an interesting year or two, with a bunch of suck thrown into the mix.

What is black and white about what he said? Please do tell bc we would all love to know your insight into the obvious comment. The whole town hall was filled with "anything could happen" rhetoric, good and bad both. So please, tell us the obvious future would you?

It’s painfully obvious he doesn’t view 50 seat jets existing after the recovery. Does that mean there won’t be any 50 seat flying? Not necessarily, but that’s a pretty damn strong signal that they are looking to axe them. There are currently 3 regionals flying exclusively 50 seat jets for United, 2 of them are owned by United. Which one do you think is going to get cut when they reduce the 50 seat flying?

Remember, this isn’t some analyst or middle manager making a “guess”, this is the guy who ultimately makes the decision.

To put it into pilot terms, you have two alternates, and you’re discussing what you’ll do if you don’t make it in on your approach. Alternate one is barely above minimums and is further away. Alternate two is well above minimums and closer. The PIC says “My best guess is that we’ll go to alternate two, I don’t see a scenario where we go to alternate one, but we’ll verify what the weather is after the go around”.

is it possible that you end up at alternate one? Sure. But the messaging is pretty clear that you’re going to alternate two unless something unforeseen happens. The PIC has a pretty good idea where they’re going.

The only honest answer to that question is I don't know and neither do you. I bet SK doesn't even know but heck I could be wrong. Look. Life is nuanced. It is not definitely anything, it is not obvious anything. It is bad, for sure. It is dangerous for us and I wouldn't be surprised if we lose the company. But spare me the "it's obvious" talk.

Exactly, then after that snarky comment, the card counter (who claims to be banned from some casinos) actually laughed. He laughed, That is what the highest of the high at that airline thinks about express employees losing their job. Vulgar! I got news for ya, when a girl sais I dont want to see you anymore, the answer you give is NOT "what do you mean by that?" Years ago there was this series of shows, books, movies, etc. "he's not that in to you" No really he is not!, get it thru your heads and plan accordingly. You dont need to imply or interpret what was said, wake up!

He’s the CEO of the company! His “Guess” carries a hell of a lot more weight than anyone else’s due to the fact that he’s the one making the decision! And then they laughed about the prospect!

I’m not a doomer and I certainly hope I’m wrong, but I’m not going to sit here for 6 months sitting on my hands while we’re flying straight towards a mountain.

I suppose the GPWS could be broken, but right now it’s saying “Caution, Terrain” and you guys are saying “there’s a chance it’s malfunctioning” instead of pulling up.

I think the ultimate outcome was pretty black white, the timeframe is debatable.

This is the most ridiculous and pathetic attempt at an analogy I have read in a long time.

...what? Who here is not pulling up? What does that even mean? I'm not saying don't prepare, I agree with you. It is likely to be bad. But it isn't obvious, that's all I'm saying!

SKs guess 6 weeks ago was a 70% drop in demand. It's 95% ok? He can guess wrong. Not that he will, but he could.

How so? The CEO of United made a statement that under most conditions means we won’t be flying anymore, and everyone here is debating about how he might not have meant what he said. Now is the time to pull the trigger on any sort of backup plan before 600 of us are fighting over a skydiving job.

Dude, go get some fresh air.

Breathing it now. Enjoy the sand.

Your tonka trucks plastic, or old school metal?

drama much?

...this has become worse than a group of sophomore girls planning their whole married life off of one drunken comment by the quarterback at an after party.

We’ve known for at least a decade that management types would love to get rid of 50 seaters and replace them with unlimited large RJs...if this can be done for ‘free’ (not having to pay any of the costs for this change and only keeping the the benefits for themselves). This is exactly what SK has done at AA and has been trying (and failing) to do at UAL since Parker fired him and the BOD picked him up to show Oscar the exit and put the screws on labor groups to increase profits.

He NEEDS a large scope cave for any of this to mean a single hill of beans—I cannot be any more explicit about this but people around here are willfully ignoring the whole set of facts. He won’t get it. If he doesn’t get a scope cave, he needs bankruptcy to try something like this. This has huge dangers for him:

1.) SK will most likely not be in charge at that point. (Except perhaps in a #5 scenario, which has been his and Parker’s MO since the AmericaWest days. There is a whole additional wrinkle to this: looking at how AA union groups have faired under Parker I would be very surprised if he got the labor buy-in from mainline to pull it off again...but who knows)
2.) The economics of small RJs on a trip cost basis will be very apparent and favorable.
3.) The government will have a huge say in a quasi-nationalization (which is what a UAL bankruptcy will look like except perhaps for #5) in forcing a kind of Essential Air Service that will prop up 50 seat demand until the next wave of deregulation. 10-50 years depending upon how deep this recession/depression is.
4.) Any CAPEX will be essentially zero for the foreseeable future.
5.) Any prepackaged bankruptcy will need exit financing, probably from within the industry given how badly the sector is/will be viewed. The only two carriers that MAY be positioned to provide that and have a history of doing such deals are major UAX 50 seat operators.

Okay, and what are you suggesting we do exactly? There are no other airline jobs right now. I'm definitely not leaving AWAC when we still have a chance, especially since there's nowhere else to go anyway.

That's what the Russians did when they crashed the SuperJet 100 into the mountain...

Downgrades and furloughs are inevitable. Mke will be next. If we are lucky , IF , being invaluable,we will have a very small operation in Ord , maybe 1/4 the size it is now .
I Hope I’m wrong.

150 pilot ord base. Got it!

Again, there's absolutely nowhere to go right now, so you might as well try to ride it out. 150 pilot ORD base is completely useless, the company would just shut down. Long-term this is not going to be what happens. People will return to the airlines to be flying again, and recovery will happen by late this year or early next year.

There are still a few places out there hiring. Might need to pull some strings and call in some favors but they’re out there.

kirby was on again today on the EWR townhall. Said 757/767 most definitely done and A320 if things go deeper and longer. Again reiterated that in just about every scenario, the 50 seater is largely done.

I'm ready for Air Wisconsin: Cargo Edition

That’s not exactly what he said. He answered a fleet question and he said that if the demand is down 30% at the end of the year and expected to stay, that the 757 is most likely gone. He then said that if the 757 goes, then the 767 probably will too. If the demand worsens or stays depressed for an extended period of time the Airbus fleet would follow. He then said that he really doesn’t want to get rid of the 757 or 767 and that they would have to look at it then. He then said that the 50 seat flying will see a “significant reduction” under any scenario. He didn’t define what he meant by significant, what model of 50 seaters would be targeted first, or when this will begin. People can read into his statement what ever they need to believe at this point. He didn’t say when, or who, but if you work for a company operating 50 seat jets, the consistent message is that you will be taking a pretty big hit.

Air Wisconsin Furlough Edition
fixed it .