Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
UAL to remove seats from RJs >

UAL to remove seats from RJs

Notices

UAL to remove seats from RJs

Old 05-21-2020, 06:08 AM
  #11  
Orbis Non Sufficit
 
Nucflash's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 730
Default

Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG View Post
I personally have no doubt the company has started some discussion with ALPA on this. Based on Nocellas response regarding seat removal during the recent IR conference call, I’d say he’s been given an answer......

Lee
SO, put 2 and 2 together
and plan on more than 2300 gone in October....simple as that.
Nucflash is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 06:38 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Default

Originally Posted by Nucflash View Post
SO, put 2 and 2 together
and plan on more than 2300 gone in October....simple as that.
Why not wait until they start taking seats out of the planes before we start 'planning' on specific number of furloughs?

They speak 'words' and they do 'deeds'. Words are cheap. Deeds will show you their intentions.

They have some finite decision points when they will be forced to show their hands. Things like furlough notification, fleet retirements, removal of seats from RJs, displacement of PIs from 777 or 757/767 fleets to the 737/320, etc... Someone smarter and more motivated than me can map those out.
AxlF16 is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 06:48 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cadetdrivr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Default

Originally Posted by Nucflash View Post
SO, put 2 and 2 together
and plan on more than 2300 gone in October....simple as that.
Very likely.

It’s also very likely that the company wants to hedge all their bets for maximum flexibility. Nobody, including the company, knows how all this will play out. The company was fine buying brand new 70-seat E175s prior to Covid, so removing seats on the other 175s is pretty low hanging fruit to maintain flexibility. If they make the decision later to furlough more than 2300 it could be too late to start removing seats in time.

It’s also posturing on the part of the company. The labor strategy folks always love using FUD when they want concessions and removing seats is small potatoes compared to some of the stuff they’ve pulled over the years.
cadetdrivr is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 06:55 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SONORA PASS's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Left - Dodge Caravan
Posts: 357
Default

Originally Posted by HuggyU2 View Post
There has got to be a smarter answer than requiring 6 seats to be pulled off of 76 seaters. The same goal of having only 70 available seats can be done cheaper and easier... and the cost savings can be quantified.

How about if the union agrees to simply block off the seats... split the savings with the company... and put that money in to the furlough fund?
HuggyU2,

There is a smarter answer than requiring 6 seats to be pulled off of 76 seat aircraft: Put United Pilots back in the front 2 seats.

United Airlines would rather pull those seats and furlough pilots than let them fly any United's 76 seat aircraft. Insourcing is the smarter answer, pulling the seats and furloughing pilots is the refusal to accept that answer.

SP
SONORA PASS is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 07:04 AM
  #15  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
Default

Originally Posted by SONORA PASS View Post
HuggyU2,

There is a smarter answer than requiring 6 seats to be pulled off of 76 seat aircraft: Put United Pilots back in the front 2 seats.

United Airlines would rather pull those seats and furlough pilots than let them fly any United's 76 seat aircraft. Insourcing is the smarter answer, pulling the seats and furloughing pilots is the refusal to accept that answer.

SP
I’d love to see that, but if it made financial sense for us to fly 76 seaters rather than farming it out, we’d have hundreds of them running around right now. With all of the associated cost of operating them on the United certificate, farming them out within the limitations of our contract is still cheaper.
Itsajob is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 07:12 AM
  #16  
Orbis Non Sufficit
 
Nucflash's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 730
Default

Originally Posted by AxlF16 View Post
Why not wait until they start taking seats out of the planes before we start 'planning' on specific number of furloughs?

They speak 'words' and they do 'deeds'. Words are cheap. Deeds will show you their intentions.

They have some finite decision points when they will be forced to show their hands. Things like furlough notification, fleet retirements, removal of seats from RJs, displacement of PIs from 777 or 757/767 fleets to the 737/320, etc... Someone smarter and more motivated than me can map those out.
Agreed. Frankly, the company may be viewing the “minimal” (Nocella’s word) outlay to pull the seats as a way to buy them a bit more negotiating capital and instill a little fear. The association will be closely monitoring *IF* the mods actually take place. My general assumption is that the company will proceed as Nocella outlined and I feel we should be prepared for the eventuality that management will exercise the full contractual rights they are allowed.
Nucflash is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 07:15 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 693
Default

I don't think Nocella's wording means it's a done deal - though in my useless opinion I'd still put it past 50%. It seems more like them saying "yeah we've got a plan in place ready to execute by 1 OCT to remove seats" and they'd be negligent not to have a plan for that. Still 4+ months for things to turn one way or the other.
Chuck D is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 07:29 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SONORA PASS's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Left - Dodge Caravan
Posts: 357
Default

Originally Posted by Itsajob View Post
I’d love to see that, but if it made financial sense for us to fly 76 seaters rather than farming it out, we’d have hundreds of them running around right now. With all of the associated cost of operating them on the United certificate, farming them out within the limitations of our contract is still cheaper.
Itsajob,

So is farming out the 737 and 320 flying for that matter; the company would do that it a heartbeat if we let them.

Itsajob we traded away for promises not kept.

SP
SONORA PASS is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 07:46 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,128
Default

Article is poorly titled and misleading - no official decision has been announced on this (but I'd bet on it happening). From the article:
In the meantime we can expect United to remove seats from regional jets to comply with their pilots contract as they move to furlough large numbers of employees effective October 1.

No duh. They're making plans to remove 6 seats. That is one row of coach seats.

The seats are all on a track system. It's probably not that hard to remove one row of seats and move the rest of the coach seats to give a bit more legroom.
Andy is offline  
Old 05-21-2020, 08:02 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 693
Default

1.5 rows fwiw
Chuck D is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EZBW
United
131
05-04-2017 08:19 PM
Lbell911
SkyWest
16
04-19-2015 08:19 AM
LAfrequentflyer
Hangar Talk
2
02-01-2006 05:39 AM
HSLD
Major
14
01-30-2006 01:08 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices