Originally Posted by 121again

It's chicken and egg. The reason so relatively few pilots are on the company health care plan is exactly because it's so horrible. Everyone is getting it from somewhere. Are you supporting the union's position that we should all rely on Obamacare or our spouses's coverage for health insurance?

Originally Posted by Navmode

Not at all, I'm merely playing devil's advocate. If you want my opinion, everyone should make $100k, healthcare should be free, and the company should buy everyone a Ferrari every year. However in reality, they negotiate on a fixed amount of money based on projected profits for the life of the proposed contract. That means once we fill our bag with 'whatever' that reaches that amount, then there's no more to get. This is regardless of how much leverage we have reference their ability to hire fo's or how bad the current book is.

Originally Posted by Navmode

Not at all, I'm merely playing devil's advocate. If you want my opinion, everyone should make $100k, healthcare should be free, and the company should buy everyone a Ferrari every year. However in reality, they negotiate on a fixed amount of money based on projected profits for the life of the proposed contract. That means once we fill our bag with 'whatever' that reaches that amount, then there's no more to get. This is regardless of how much leverage we have reference their ability to hire fo's or how bad the current book is.

Originally Posted by Navmode

It's absolutely not cost-neutral. Have you seen a lot of our pilots? Not to rake the mud, but I wouldn't say most of the guys over 35 take very good care of themselves. Even if every pilot was an iron man champion, that doesn't speak to what it would cost to insure their family members.

Originally Posted by Navmode

It's absolutely not cost-neutral. Have you seen a lot of our pilots? Not to rake the mud, but I wouldn't say most of the guys over 35 take very good care of themselves. Even if every pilot was an iron man champion, that doesn't speak to what it would cost to insure their family members.

Originally Posted by 121again

If you don't mind saying where do you get your health insurance?

Originally Posted by 121again

The negotiators said when they tried to bring up health insurance the company got nervous about their exposure worrying pilots would flock to the company plans if they made improvements. Let's be clear the company does not want you or your family on Mesa's health insurance. The exorbitant cost are designed precisely to drive people away. I realize there is only so much money to go around but we should not be enabling the company to get away with this pretending it's not an issue. After seeing the lackluster "gains" in this TA that still allows the company to get away with murder I've come to the conclusion that ignoring health insurance was a mistake. While it might not be as "sexy" as Long Call Reserve, etc. it is money in your pocket. And for that matter what percentage of the pilots are on reserve anyway? If you want to put it all towards compensation I get it, but just understand a cut in insurance is the same as a raise.

Originally Posted by flapshalfspeed

We pay the MEC/NC to analyze all possible avenues to improvements in things such as health insurance. They did not analyze the potential improvements yielded from a pilots-only plan, nor did they analyze the costs assuming every pilot and their family enrolled. Unions do this--real unions do this--they exhaust every possible avenue to improvements, even in a cost-neutral environment. They don't just throw their hands in the air like helpless Gomer Pyles and say "welp, I uh guess that's all she wrote, Andy!"

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

If anyone's interested, I went thru UALs contract (scope agreement), fleet, and, fleet plan, as well as the UAX feed just so I had a better understanding of UAL/UAX. Can't verify its accuracy as I got some fleet numbers/orders from Wikipedia. Feel free to correct any wrong data.

What is allowed by UAL scope after 1JAN16: 255 total 70/76 seaters, max 153 76 seaters. Can be increased to 325 total if narrowbody UAL acft are increased (1:1.25 ratio), but max 70 seaters is 102 if total number goes beyond 255. So:
70 seaters: 102
76 seaters: 153

What exists:
70 seaters: 155 (153 now + 2 on order)
-115 CR7s (25 gojet/20 Mesa/70 skybest (retiring some of SKW's 700s)
-38 e170s (+2 on order) at S5
76 seaters: 138 (65 e175s now plus 73 on order between S5/SKW)

By the orders, 43 CR7s will have to be retired as the ejets come online. I think those are all from SKW.

That leaves 15 e175s to max out 76 seaters (assuming no mainline growth) at the 255 total number. If mainline adds narrow bodies, more 76 seaters can be added.