This isn’t entirely accurate. Assume most will be on reserve, so working 8-9 day per month. On the plus side, if you live in base, you probably don’t have to work at all except for a landings class every 90 days. So, if you believe that the company will furlough 3000 at the end of year, it’s the difference between making zero with some health benefits or making $5k to $6k with all benefits and B fund contribution for 8 days a month or less. The biggest benefit of this scheme is that, if the gamble pays off, the company is in a position to get you back to full mpg faster than if it has to grow out of a 3000+ furlough hole.

 

First post ever on this forum since it is mostly people attempting to prove they are the smartest person in the room/thread, though I've been with UAL since Jan 2001. I'm a hard "No" on this (or any concessionary) AIP. My reasoning: Furloughed twice, lost approximately 4-5% in seniority during the ISL to uCAL pilots hired 8 years after me, had to fight tooth and nail to get longevity for pay established years after merger completed, and now only have about 12 years left to maximize my compensation until forced to retire from this sorry profession. After all of that, I STILL end up in the bottom 1/3 of the seniority list and (IF rumors are valid) would be vulnerable to displacement and face a 50% cut in MPG . . . YGTBFSM after being on the books for 19 years! I get that TI and the MEC are obligated to attempt to save as many jobs as they can, but this alleged flaming pile of crap is not the vehicle. To those hired in the last 10 years, I and many others have watched this company/MEC clown act for a long while and what the rumored AIP is proposing establishes dangerous precedents and will require enormous effort and 10+ years for recovery. I also get (first hand) being furloughed sucks, but you also need a job worth coming back to/having. To steal a quote from Jason Bourne, "I'm on my own side now." To steal another quote from Henry Hill (and seen many times on this forum), "F$^* You . . . Pay Me!"

 

Sucks for everyone involved. Luckily we have all had over 6 months to get our households in order. Asking the middle 3rd to live off of $140k on min guarantee is easier than asking the bottom 3rd to live off $0. In this current situation we find ourselves in, its hard to find a win. Id argue that the ability to bounce back before the other 2 guys provides much more job security and growth in the coming years. Unfortunately as much as we preach unionism and solidarity, you really get to see who is all about "me" in situations like this. I'm ok with working fewer days (for fewer dollars respectively) if it means that someone junior who's family depends on them can keep their job.

 

I know that you would probably not cross a picket line, but I hope you and others along this mindset can understand that those two quotes sound a lot more like scab reasoning, than they do a member of the union who is looking out for his brothers and sisters.

“i’ve seen enough that I can make sound decisions to help myself” is the exact opposite sentiment of solidarity.

The double furloughees at United obviously have a right to feel this way… But please just don’t come on here and tell me you are a strong unionist, when the second a pay cut comes your way you start questioning the character of the MEC.

not to mention, all the “no concessions” guys were “my union speaks for me,” until the MEC decided to POSSIBLY send a TA to them... Funny how that works

there is obviously not a right or wrong answer here. If the TA comes to us, we all simply have to assess what we are giving to the company, and how vulnerable we think those provisions are long-term and weigh that against the benefits we see coming to this pilot group as a whole. If you’re not inclined to worry about the pilot group as a whole, that is fine. But maybe ask yourself how much of our pilot group you do worry about… Because everything is a spectrum, and maybe you are closer to the f-you (other pilots) pay me mentality than you think

 

Can you define concession for me? What if my definition is different?

When you got hired at UAL did you realize that we had a seniority based system? IF UAL decides to furlough pilots they will come from the bottom of this list. The fault for the furlough will NEVER lay with another pilot (or block of pilots). Look, I'm on board with considering options to mitigate or eliminate furloughs, but the idea that I OWE you that is wrong. This attitude is not helping your cause.

 

I don’t think most junior people feel they are owed anything. I honestly think that’s your preconceived notion about what someone’s beliefs are … But I think the idea that junior pilots are furlough fodder for bad Times is not an idea I would like to take as a core UAL ALPA belief going forward. I would rather have provisions à la FedEx that allow for some reduction in MPG for unforecast events. And plan my finances accordingly for the events we will inevitable hit every 10 years or so. I’m okay if my earning potential is less because of this. I would rather fly with junior FOs knowing we as UAL pilots do our best to take care of those junior pilots who take a huge chance coming here in their 40s.

we have legal teams our dues pay a lot of money for to look at how the language could be crafted, and even then I would have to read it for myself. But as stated many times, as a junior captain not holding a furlough letter, I for one would consider a (Hypothetical) TA that effectively delivers me a 66% paycut (NB CA to 50% NB FO) If it kept people off the street

 

I’ve been clear about this previously, but my take on this is definitely colored by the fact that I flew predominately with half-wingers. I heard many stories about what it took to get to UAL and how precarious their family lives often were trying to make the “dream job” work.

The overwhelming feeling I had was gratitude for my good fortune and now thinking about what will happen to many of the half-wingers I flew with doesn’t sit well with me. It doesn’t matter where we draw the furlough line… I could be on the good or the bad side, but I just do not philosophically believe that as a union member we pull up the ladder behind the system plug and tell furloughees “good luck” during one of the worst aviation employment environments in history

there are lots of different things we can leverage our power as a union to achieve… I will say once more that I do not have all the answers or think there are even right answers. But I think we want to be clear on what our values are… And not just view UAL ALPA as “dues paid” for collective bargaining and medical or legal advice

 

Do not lecture me on solidarity, "scab-ness," and being a strong unionist. You have no idea idea who I am or my professional background. The "own-side" quote means that after dealing with this b.s. for years, I will vote on this AIP based on what is best for me and my family as precisely will you. If we're making suppositions on each other's motivations and reasoning, if you say you're not going to vote that way, you are a liar. This will be my last post reference my first sentence . . . jack ball's out to prove they are the smartest in the room.

 

I was furloughed in 2004 from LUal and I did not want nor expect any reduction in pay or lower mpg from pilots senior to me. I knew the chances of leaving active duty to come here and I don’t begrudge anyone senior to me because they didn’t mitigate my furlough. Yes it sucked, but I knew the risk coming in. If sounds to me if this AIP rumor is true, the mitigation of furloughs are coming on our backs and not management’s.

 

I was simply responding to quotes you posted to summarize your viewpoints. I think the quotes spoke for themselves.

furthermore, I generally find that the more sensitive people are about their beliefs, ultimately the less certain they truly are of where they stand.