|
Originally Posted by Jetlikespeed
(Post 3964022)
based on my chat gpt it seems to think SFO will be reduced to help staff San Diego, but as a result whole it’ll be a net gain in terms of upgrades therefore nobody has to voluntarily downgrade. And the amount of commuters I talk with within SFO seems like a lot of them would happily commute to San Diego. At least in the left seat can’t speak for FO as I am one. Don’t talk to them as much. I’m hoping for a net gain as well.
maybe that’s just it maybe they’re doing basing staffing off what ChatGPT says haha |
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 3964012)
SFO is a United superhub. SAN is not. In fact, no major airline has a pilot base there. Our “experiment” is far more likely to do well/work in SAN than it is SFO.
|
Originally Posted by GoodJet
(Post 3964020)
Another base could open with a net gain. Great job at being obtuse though. 10/10
A net gain is irrelevant when vacancies are awarded first, especially when there are many senior FOs who want to upgrade. Example, -80 Capt and +100 will create 20 net new CAs. But the 100 CA positions are awarded first, including current CAs bidding around the system AND super senior FOs taking the upgrade. The base to be reduced doesn’t backfill their departure. But at some point, the reductions are processed and the displaced CAs use their seniority to start forcing other junior CAs out in any base. Since the 20 extra CA slots are still taken in the vacancy process by super senior FOs, the bumping of CAs can happen on currently very junior CA side. |
Originally Posted by flysnoopy76
(Post 3964028)
Recent history has seen Alaska withdraw from Oakland almost entirely. We are in the process of withdrawing from SFO, SJC is shrinking, LAX is shrinking, and #mostwestcoast was a joke. I don’t see San Diego going any differently regardless of who does or doesn’t have a hub there.
|
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 3964030)
You said as long as it doesn’t close with a Reduction bid. Yet call me being obtuse? You’re either willfully ignorant or just gaslighting.
A net gain is irrelevant when vacancies are awarded first, especially when there are many senior FOs who want to upgrade. Example, -80 Capt and +100 will create 20 net new CAs. But the 100 CA positions are awarded first, including current CAs bidding around the system AND super senior FOs taking the upgrade. The base to be reduced doesn’t backfill their departure. But at some point, the reductions are processed and the displaced CAs use their seniority to start forcing other junior CAs out in any base. Since the 20 extra CA slots are still taken in the vacancy process by super senior FOs, the bumping of CAs can happen on currently very junior CA side. Also: I can't figure out if you're going to tell me I should be thankful for my job like the Kool Aid man smashing through a wall. Or call me an idiot for saying I'd likely be downgraded in the next 2 years in 2024. Or telling me I'm going to lose my seat because our employer can't compete in California. |
Originally Posted by GoodJet
(Post 3964049)
Well great yet another reason I should have tried to leave for UAL in 2021.
Also: I can't figure out if you're going to tell me I should be thankful for my job like the Kool Aid man smashing through a wall. Or call me an idiot for saying I'd likely be downgraded in the next 2 years in 2024. Or telling me I'm going to lose my seat because our employer can't compete in California. |
Originally Posted by STIorSTD
(Post 3964050)
Do you guys have a lot of pilots leaving for UA in SFO and DL in SEA? I assume your upgrade times are long as well…
|
Originally Posted by flysnoopy76
(Post 3964024)
There is zero chance we will maintain a pilot base in SFO after SAN is opened. I would be surprised if LAX is still a pilot base in 3-5 years.
|
Originally Posted by GoodJet
(Post 3964049)
Well great yet another reason I should have tried to leave for UAL in 2021.
Also: I can't figure out if you're going to tell me I should be thankful for my job like the Kool Aid man smashing through a wall. Or call me an idiot for saying I'd likely be downgraded in the next 2 years in 2024. Or telling me I'm going to lose my seat because our employer can't compete in California. |
Originally Posted by GoodJet
(Post 3964052)
I know we did have a lot of people leaving prior to 2024. Anyone younger than 40 likely should leave considering the long upgrade time and lack of any career opportunities outside of sitting on reserve out of base for ages.
*insert Pepe huffing copeium meme* |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:07 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands