flybynuts

First, for you to put on any hat will require you to pull your head out of your butt. You sound like a scab who is afraid of his own shadow. We are not asking for 380/hr for 737 CA. You need to evalutate your self worth again. If you are at CAL, PM me and let me know who you are so I put you on my avoid fly list.

flybynuts

IAH,
If we loose medicore to poor jobs to remain competative, then this job is not worth having. Cargo is different from passenger but when did this really change and why? Ask yourself this and the answer stems to the Corporate greed mantra that has been here for the last decade and not so much on business fundamentals. I love seeing my CEO become the highest paid airline CEO while they demand more concessions. Think about it....

flybynuts

You're a piece of work dude. I hope that you are in the EXTREME minority at CAL.

Never mind.....this is pointless....

James is off to self medicate


These scabs are dying at CAL. It is beautiful to watch them kill themselves flying 100 hr months and justify why. I just push thier buttons and laugh the whole time. They get worked up when I start the APU because the plane is hot. Save the company! Yes, most of the guys are falling to the sides and us real pilots will move to the future.

UalHvy

Jeff? Is that you?

DaveNelson

Southwest is no longer a low-cost airline, and it hasn't been for some time. The only "cost" that was lower, for a while, was fuel because it took a gamble and hedged extensively. As you'll recall, CAL tried to hedge a while back and it backfired. Southwest is now on a level playing field with the rest of us with regard to fuel prices.

It is totally unionized has has been for decades.

When Herb Kelleher and Lamar Muse started Southwest in the late 1970s, they make a strategic decision with regard to labor. They weren't going to fight their employees. Rather than hiring a union-busing law firm to discourage organization, Herb actually violated the Railway Labor Act for a few months by giving its fledgling pilots' union space in the company headquarters building until it could lease its own property.

IAHflyr, are you the "one" person who wrote Jay Pierce in favor of Delta +1 a few weeks ago? You'll recall that our MEC Chair put out a call for anyone who favored that proposal -- once management posted its opener on its negotiations web site -- to drop him a line. One Continental pilot wrote in favor. Was that you?

Now, as far as your contention that Delta has an "industry leading contract," take a look at its scope clause. No, CAL and UAL have better scope clauses than that.

Are you really in favor of adopting a contract that will allow the company to operate some 25 of the 95-seat regional jets? How many of your fellow pilots, at legacy United and legacy Continental, would be furloughed by such a provision?

If you're in favor of that, I can't help you.

iahflyr

I did not say that overall Delta has an industry leading contract. I was referring to Delta's pay rates (which are industry leading). This is what we were offered and I believe this is a good offer.


CAL has industry leading scope. I think we will probably end up with UAL's scope. I think it would be too costly to try and get them to go back to 50 seat scope (seeing as how there are long term contracts for 70 seat airplanes, and every other legacy carrier is 70+). I would vote for a scope clause similar to this: All airplanes with 71 or more seats, or with a MGTOW of whatever the EMB-170 is + 1 pound will be flown by United pilots on the United seniority list.

To answer your question DaveNelson, no that was not me. I would not be in favor of that because I believe United's scope should limit regional flying to 70 seats and a MGTOW.

shiznit

I might give you that CAL has a better scope clause than DAL when it comes to RJ's, but DAL just might have a better scope clause overall than UAL.

What kind of protections do you have with Star Alliance carriers and "sharing the flying"?

Aer Lingus IAD-MAD anyone? (NOT allowed in any way shape or form at DAL)

Does UAL RJ 51-76 seat scope have a hard cap or does it change with the size of the mainline fleet? (DAL is hard capped at 255 outsourced large RJ's no matter how big the mainline fleet gets).


Let's not kind ourselves though...SWA has the best scope clause among US passenger airlines.

DaveNelson

Smisek was offering Delta +1 as a complete package. If we take it, we get its scope as well as its pay rates. In any event, what Smisek is offering in the way of compensation isn't really what the Delta pilots received. They also got, in addition to those hourly rates, an equity stake in the company that was convertible on Day No. 1 of the contract. Jeffery conveniently leaves that part out.

Obviously, you are as out of step with the rest of the pilot group's desires on scope as you are with the remainder of the inadequate Delta +1 offer. Our negotiating team included with its opener pay rates for 70-seat and 95-seat regional jets, to be flown by United pilots on the United seniority list. There are indeed provisions for phasing in that flying in recognition of present contracts.

The bottom line, IAHflyr, is that by endorsing a 70-seat SCOPE (which Smisek would not accept; he wants 95), you're endorsing the furlough of your pilot brothers and sisters. Not one lost job is acceptable to me, and to the majority of the new United's pilots.

shiznit

amen!!!!!!!

ualratt

No, because after exiting BK with the lowest pilot compensation industry wide, they were still tethering on a second bankruptcy as if you can't remember. Plan A was the same as B and plan C. Someone to tie the knot with. Without that the company was headed for another day in court.

The big picture dude, the big one...