Originally Posted by FyrePilot

The difference is UA problems mentioned are from factors outside of their control. FAA limiting arrivals at SFO, ORD is maxxed as well as EWR. Most premium pay passengers in DC or NY do not want to go to the airports UA is big at.

IAH and ORD compete with WN hubs.

UA bought a ton of planes. There is no place to grow physically with gates and landing slots. They are flying to Mongolia and Greenland with NBs. I don't see how they make money with that kind of flying.


Problems at our company are internal and controllable once some changes are made. Why they have not gutted DBMS, and come up with a complete replacement and entire new section 23 in our PWA with enough $$ and QOL improvements for us to agree to it is beyond me. Maybe they just really like paying people lots of money to not work.

200+ cancellations so far today. Not for weather. This has got to have the attention of people that make decisions

Originally Posted by Ripinpeace

No they aren’t. Their hubs are all constrained by the FAA and/or construction with too many new planes coming in. That’s fine, but a vast majority of these new planes will be replacements rather than growth due to flexing out the older aircraft earlier. The plan was for them to hold onto older 320 and 737’s much longer and the unplanned 777PW going down left and right will result in reduced hiring (as we’ve seen).

Increased hiring at UA post-summer is a whisper, no statement from management about “surging” NH classes post Summer.

Originally Posted by FyrePilot

The difference is UA problems mentioned are from factors outside of their control. FAA limiting arrivals at SFO, ORD is maxxed as well as EWR. Most premium pay passengers in DC or NY do not want to go to the airports UA is big at.

IAH and ORD compete with WN hubs.

UA bought a ton of planes. There is no place to grow physically with gates and landing slots. They are flying to Mongolia and Greenland with NBs. I don't see how they make money with that kind of flying.


Problems at our company are internal and controllable once some changes are made. Why they have not gutted DBMS, and come up with a complete replacement and entire new section 23 in our PWA with enough $$ and QOL improvements for us to agree to it is beyond me. Maybe they just really like paying people lots of money to not work.

200+ cancellations so far today. Not for weather. This has got to have the attention of people that make decisions

Originally Posted by C17man

Why does UA keep coming up? This is internal to DAL and has nothing to do with SK/UA.

Originally Posted by khergan

Because Ripin can't get Kirby out of his mind and is highly insecure about him. Kirby occupies free real estate in his mind and as such has to constantly defend against the boogeyman that nobody else mentioned.

Originally Posted by FyrePilot

Good news is probably enough market share for DL and UA to not really hurt or be hurt by each other

Originally Posted by sl0wr0ll3r

And this is a good thing for the industry’s pilots. We need more than one thriving carrier to pattern bargain in a positive direction.

Originally Posted by Jp8burner

I would expect any agreement the company wants to include better access to reserves and better ability to reroute crews.

Originally Posted by flightlessbirds

Hard no to either of these. No thanks, we can keep current contract if those are company "must haves."

WS above RSV is sancrosanct in my opinion, it drives RSV utilization down and has a multiplier effect for swap/drop/premium opportunities, all apart from m7 and aa.

We put the cat in the bag on RRTE in C19, not willing to go backwards one inch.