This is innuendo put out by the MEC which led to the discussion on here and now starting on the line that somehow we need to be worried about UAL long haul flying. In 1998, the company argued that capital was limited so that meant we had money to buy 50 seaters or we had money to keep flying 747s but we didn't have money for both. The pilots were scared into submission by ALPA leaders, and we signed up for 2 decades of out sourcing our own jobs.

The argument was pure balderdash.

Today our own union has hinted at a similar argument. The company can out source at the short end OR at the long end, and we don't have enough negotiating capital to fix everything.

Balderdash.

UAL has a highly planned capital budget with known purchases of large equipment. We already have a WB fleet 20% bigger than AA and DAL and we are minting money. Management even has taken flying back from Lufthansa in a couple hubs and talked about that in town hall meetings. Kirby has ZERO intention of presiding over a domestic carrier. His sights are set on making United THE premier global carrier and he has said such over and over. You don't do that by outsourcing your most profitable and prestigious routes.

We can tighten the language on JVs if necessary without a second thought towards RJ Scope relaxation, and the MEC/NC are simply making excuses. I had faith in Todd, but if this is coming from him then he needs to go and we need someone in the lead who will start accelerating the negotiations to what seems to be an inevitable fight. Enough with the Kum-by-ya era. I freely admit that 2 years ago I believed the words of our MEC Chair and CEO that this time would be different, but by now it should be clear it is not.

ALPA keeps telling us we fast tracked large swaths of the contract and there are only 3 major issues left which usually go fast once the company decides they are ready. Well then . . . Get 'er done. Take a strike vote or whatever the next step is or at the very least stop playing the patsy and put out a strongly worded update stating loudly and clearly that the number one issue for 99% of the pilots at UAL today is Scope and there will be NO give on that. Stop with the double speak innuendo on Scope. ALPA polled the pilots and have the direction they need. Time to execute on the wishes of the line pilots.

Each and everyone reading this thread or similar threads online needs to contact their ALPA reps by email and simply re-iterate that Scope IS NOT FOR SALE. Move on.

 

Minus a hundred pounds or so.

 

Their thinking is quite alike. You could replace Kirby at UAL with JO and we wouldn't know the difference. Their thinking is very much alike.

Do it at the lowest cost and to the lowest bidder; quality be dammed.

I bet we all get some cool new Raybans in our V files for Christmas.

 

We sure as hell won't be getting a TA.

 

Not directly related, but interesting information none the less:

THE REAL REASON UNITED AIRLINES IS BUYING EXPRESSJET

and also this little tid-bit from a Bloomberg article:

United Targets Big Spenders With First Class in Small Cities

 

I think it's related. It probably gave them the "initial reasoning and logic" to do the deal. Once they realized the genuis of the deal, in that they could simply re-configure the aircraft as needed they saw it as a whip-saw to cut the legs out from under our scope clause and force us to defend it from a different attack point.

One of the top 3 reasons for the UAL-CAL merger was to find a way to defeat CAL scope language. It was a hindrance to the kind of "network oriented" and "non-organic" growth that both Larry Kellner and Jacques Lapointe favored. Evidence of this approach can be found in how they went all in on RJ's for the smaller routes, and went in big time on code-sharing for long haul without buying expensive 777 aiframes from Boeing.


Both Kellner and Lapointe wanted connectivity growth only and with zero to little cost associated with it. Their two major costs were labor and fuel. Pushing those costs to either LCC's, code share partners, or regional partners lowers, defrays, and mitigates those costs to a high degree. If you can out-source instead of in-source your entire cost structure is lowered, and you can then at that point start hiding the money, moving the money, and start giving out sweet executive compensation and stock option packages. The employees will never find the money and say good bye to profit sharing due to clever accounting and write-offs/mark-offs.

Since CAL was actually experiencing a liquidity shortfall due to failed short term investments, anticipated run on the bank for higher paid pilots retirements, and lack of high yield PRASMs it was only a matter of time til they had to find a dance "merger" partner.

Most of the short term cash struggle was because of Jacques Lapointe's leveraging of short term investments, and how he invested retirement funds, and in his abysmal failure (gambling) on fuel hedges. When the chickens came home to roost the pilots had to bail him and Larry out in our now famous POS 02 give-backs, and it's associated PBS debacle that ensued. it's the concession that keeps on giving.

We need stronger scope to account for this recent attack and likely more ingenuous ones to follow in the future. If Todd Insler is reading this I hope he understands the threat(s). It's time to go on the offensive instead of being defensive. Honey Badger time.

 

They share allot of similarities in how they think and how they are wired. I wouldn't trust either one of them with my wallet.

 

Todd doesn't read forums, but he sure as heck reads and responds to emails. I know I don't need to say this to you, but I will reiterate that all concerned UAL pilots should email their reps to voice their opinion on Kirby's continued verbal and public assault on Scope, and to remind our UAL-ALPA reps that Scope is the one issue simply not open for "give and take". If the company needs more 76 seaters so badly go buy a NSNB like Delta did and stop whining how you are competing with "one hand tied behind your back."

Don't know about everyone else, but I have started a new savings account where I put all my "extra" pay these day. Think I'll probably put the p.s. check in there as well.

 

Not even close. We may not agree with Kirby on scope, but you can’t deny he and Oscar are doing an amazing job with this place, especially once they booted the previous legacy carriers regime.

That was the CAL/Smiesk way.

Look at how many mainline airplanes we have coming over the next few months, the Max not withstanding.

 

No, Kirby is an old dog and doesn't know he new tricks. While you are experiencing some "good will" and no outwardly viewed adversarial relationship with labor, make no mistake, they aren't your friends.

We can package up some super cool bravo awards, and give each other high fives and wear some purple barney style uniforms, but none of that has anything to do with their long term goals of lowering the cost of a pilot, and therefore lowering your career expectations. To think otherwise is foolish and naieve.

Smizek didn't know airlines, or labor. He cherry-picked what he was told, and faked it. He relied upon what was previously built. So, you would be wrong on the economics side. Now, Smizek was a prick, and he was on the same page with the CAL micromanagers who had their thumb on labor. Smizek didn't know numbers regarding PRASM's and RASM's. He just used what Lapointe had set up.

Sure, Oscar and his team have tried hard NOT to rock the labor boat. He brought in people to do the dirty work, and one of them is Kirby. I think we in pilot land can agree Kirby's playbook won't change. Same Kirby that AA had is the one we got.

If Kirby is such a great dude, then how come we ain't got our contract?

Be careful not to mistake these shiney new jets with the legendary miracle lure. Pilots are attracted to shiney new jets. it's a syndrome. There is a prescription. Here is step one. A dose of honesty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUk9FBsRaUI