Contract 2019

Subscribe
2  8  9  10  11  12  13 
Page 12 of 13
Go to
Quote: Exactly we are paid industry rates for the 767-300 what would you like to give up to pay for this luxury. And with the 787’s coming to EWR even more opportunity to bid off the 767.
Why on earth did we settle for this in the first place? Guess CAL did something right for once paying out the 767-200's at a widebody rate defying the rest of the "industry".
Reply
They could do that because the rest of our contract was a joke, zero work rules, dh over to Europe to work it back, 50% dh, although that was temporary,rest seat in coach, just to name a few. Yes maybe we defied the industry standard on 767-200 rates(for 12 airplanes) but the rest of the contract was well below industry standard
Reply
Quote: You were not lied to. 21 of the 35 UA 763's are 25 years or older which is the planned retirement age for mainline jets. The decision to extend their lives was made based on recent circumstances. UA 763s are paid comparably to DAL and AAL, and the 16 764 that are about 17 years old pay the same as 777s.

It has also been almost six years since the contract was signed. You have had ample opportunity to escape the injustice that is the 763.

The plane weighs almost three times more than a 737-800, can fly twice as far, carries more people and a lot more cargo, yet only pays $10 more per hour. Who cares what DAL and AMR pay for theirs. For everyone who escapes it's "injustice", someone else has to fly it.
Reply
Quote: They could do that because the rest of our contract was a joke, zero work rules, dh over to Europe to work it back, 50% dh, although that was temporary,rest seat in coach, just to name a few. Yes maybe we defied the industry standard on 767-200 rates(for 12 airplanes) but the rest of the contract was well below industry standard
Can't argue with that but when we finally did come together, we were supposedly taking the best from each others contracts. As we went with the previous CAL category pay, the 767-300 should have spilled over into the same category that the much smaller 767-200 did. I've got to agree with Baseball as both NC Committee's did sell the fix as unnecessary due to the 767-300's upcoming rapid departure from the fleet. Utter nonsense that nobody should have listened to but it was out there and discussed extensively and probably affected some of our yes voters.
Reply
If I remember correctly the CAL contract had the 767-400 at the same pay as 777? The UAL contract had 757 & 767 grouped together at a higher rate that A320 and 727, but less than 777. The historical idea seemed to be pay the two together at a higher rate and more pilots will benefit than having 767 higher and 757 lower.

Also UAL was the kick-off customer in 1981/82 for the first 767. I think it was sold contractually as a size between narrow and wide body, 727/DC8 and DC10/747. We also had multiple pay rates for sizes based on GW; 3 727 rates, multiple DC8, DC10-10, -30, 747... it got a bit confusing, but in it all we never had a pay check screw-up.
Reply
If we just replace all the 767’s with 787/A330 this conversation becomes a moot point.

MAKEUNITEDGREATAGAIN
Reply
Um...
Can we get back to Fussball talk?!
Some interesting games so far. Lot's of upsets and sleeper teams.
Getting interesting as the 2nd set of games get going!

Motch~
Reply
Quote: if we just replace all the 767’s with 787/a330 this conversation becomes a moot point.

Makeunitedgreatagain
muga, fupm 2019
Reply
Quote: Um...
Can we get back to Fussball talk?!
Some interesting games so far. Lot's of upsets and sleeper teams.
Getting interesting as the 2nd set of games get going!

Motch~
If you want to talk soccer, may I suggest Grinder?
Reply
Quote: Um...
Can we get back to Fussball talk?!
Some interesting games so far. Lot's of upsets and sleeper teams.
Getting interesting as the 2nd set of games get going!

Motch~



Brazil 2018 World Cup champs
Reply
2  8  9  10  11  12  13 
Page 12 of 13
Go to