Not an original thought, I know, but the outsourcing of flying itself is the problem, not the status of any individual group. If my pilot group is whip-sawed and I lose my job to a union brother, does that make it any better? No it does not.

We will most likely never be able to get all airline pilots on a National Seniority List, but we can get all pilots doing our flying on OUR seniority list. This will provide job security for all and prevent the race to the bottom. This is what we should be discussing on our overnights and contacting our reps about.

I recall the PR that COEX put out when the first RJ came on property. "it was only to OPEN new markets." That was the bait and switch that was used on us, and then the entire industry. No one is making you take on more 145 Airframes. Just say NO! If you can't staff it, you can't fly it. Simple as that.

While I would LOVE that.. I am also a realist. It will take some sort of co-ordinated direction from ALPA National/APA to go that route. Why?
Are you willing to take a pay cut (or even stagnation pay) to bring all flying inhouse? Do you believe United can turn a profit by operating a 50 seat jet at a cost that is 30-50% higher than Delta and American. Cause that's what would happen.

I have always said I would love to have every United passenger flown by a United Pilot. Not an express/regional pilot. But, when I've also said we would have to have some sort of different payscale I get accused of promoting a 'B' scale.

Well, if we decide to bring Trans States pilots and their 50 seaters in house at the bottom of our payscales, and Delta and American continue to outsource.. how does that work for us?

We (us and Delta) drew a line in the sand with the 50/70/76 seaters. Delta utilized a clause allowing them to grow the smaller/rj aircraft by getting a 100seater on mainline. We have a similar clause yet management won't utilize it.
Oh well.

So if we are not going to figure a way to bring all flying in house economically, let's figure a way out that at least doesn't screw fellow ALPA/union pilots by giving planes WE OWN to a non union carrier.
Our union should be screaming at every investors meeting that the company can grow the 76seaters but we need to get the 100seaters. That it can work. That management is lying because they want to outsource everything.

My opinion.. and hopefully you and I keep discussing this stuff on here and it translates to guys/gals taking about it over dinner on an overnight.

FS, FP and FtC
Motch

PS) We Buy It, We Fly It.

Let’s be real, our HR is running the interview process. With them at the helm, I am going to bet only 1 percent of the pilot group will make through the hiring process. I bet even our own pilots would make it through the interview process today.

You guys are so awesome. Thank You so much for this thread. It warms my heart that there are Pilots at United that feel and talk the way you guys are doing here.
It’s been my goal to fly at United since I was growing up down the road from O’Hare Airport. For a variety of reasons, it hasn’t worked out- at least not yet.
The application is in. I’m still holding out hope.

Thanks Again

I'm sure none of this will impact the summer flying. :rolleyes:

Never ever give up on that goal. perseverance pays off.

UA management is in love with rjs. Why? No one knows . In addition, the pilot pipeline to fly the rjs is quickly drying up yet they base their business model on adding more , while delta is getting rid of as many as possible, utilizing 717s and 220s.
By the time UA realize they are so far behind the 8 ball it will take them years to catch up.

UA management should have come to the conclusion by now that these rjs are doing severe damage to the UA brand name and reputation.

Nope, it was used on the other legacies in the 90's before COEX/CAL.