Andy

That's good, but I'd like to see us reduce the company's ability to outsource by lowering the numbers/changing the ratios for outsourcing.

Tighter scope limitations need to be aimed at 70/76 seaters; the area where the company's growing their outsourcing. That's the choke point.

I was very surprised to hear someone tell me that they flew a UEX RJ between LAX and SFO. We used to not allow hub to hub RJ flying. That needs to stop. All RJ flying should originate or terminate in a hub (but not originate and terminate in a hub) - the point of the RJ outsourcing is supposed to be mainline feed. Allowing UEX to operate anything outside of that limitation is not feeding the mainline.

From the contract:
1-C-1-b At least eighty percent (80%) of all United Express Flights each month shall be under 900 statute miles.

Up that to 90%.


1-C-1-d Hubs
In any Rolling Twelve-Month Period, the number of block hours of United Express Flying operated by United Express Carriers as a group non-stop between current or future Company Hubs may not exceed five percent (5%) of all United Express Flying as a percentage of the total block hours of United Express Flying. A pair of Flights by a United
Express Carrier operated under a single flight number in which one Flight is scheduled to originate at a Company Hub and the second Flight is scheduled to terminate at a second Company Hub shall be included within the five percent (5%) limitation, unless the Company
imposes an IATA Standard Schedules Information Manual Type “A” Traffic Restriction Code on the through itinerary that shall suppress the display of such itinerary.

Make that 0%. Hub to hub on RJs - tell me again why RJs are needed? Because the routes can't support mainline aircraft??? OK, then hub to hub should be 0%. Period.

Grumble

If you don't already, may I politely suggest donating a few bucks a month here. They're (we're) the ones leading the charge.

ALPA-PAC - ALPA

John Carr

EXACTLY. Everybody was creaming their jeans about the 50 seaters going away, which IS GOOD. Takes up a TO/LNDG slot yada yada...

But what's the bigger threat to the NB job? It's. It not the 50 seater that's going back and forth to AEX, LCH, CRW, or wherever else.

DashTrash

United Express is the reason why the Dr. Dao incident happened. Expansion of United Express, if not operated by United Pilots, opens the door for more Dr. Dao instances to happen because you have almost zero control over your product. Does SK want to lose another $250 million in a day again???

AboveMins

I'm not sure how Express was responsible for the Dao incident. I was under the impression that the gate was staffed by United personnel, who were the ones who handled the removal.

Sniper66

Stock is up 20% since the incident with the fake doctor

Anderson

Even when United is in control of their product, they still have brand-damaging incidents. A captain showing up to the plane in street clothes and flip flops in a seemingly unstable mental state, two pilots being arrested in Britain for positive alcohol tests, and a flight attendant intentionally blowing a slide in Houston as a form or resignation, are all recent examples of United mainline events. So I'm not so sure United express is always the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

John Carr

All complete amateurs compared to how the JB FA went out.

robthree

Mainline agents handled the situation, but the situation was created by Express crew scheduling. Perhaps mainline scheduling would have created the same problem had it been their schedule to cover, but I generally see seat assignments as soon as any DH segment is loaded into my schedule. IDK, but scheduling at UAL seems much better than at my previous carriers.

3EngineTaxi

It's time to get rid of the regional airline model. It's outdated and delivers an inferior product. All branded flying should be performed by pilots on the mainline seniority list.