Search

Notices

TA Discussion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:13 PM
  #91  
On Reserve
 
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Big5
No WARN notice for me, no displacement to cancel, top of the lower class. Looking at a 53% pay cut immediately if this passes. How is this a win for someone like me? None of the “gives” in this TA can justify or offset that kind of pay cut.
consider these 2 points:

1. LTD raise to 11k, with some provisions.
2. “pilots must be offered recall prior to any merger announcement.” If we merge we are all better off with our current list...and everyone active. If something were to happen in the spring and there are 2850 plus on the street that will directly impact the bottom 2/3rds...ask any legacy UAL guy how the merger integration went for the folks on furlough. This, in my opinion is the reason for the bottom half of the list to pay attention. Vote however you decide, but understand there are ramifications to both yes and no.
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:17 PM
  #92  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 25
Likes: 3
Default

If this thing isn’t trending in the right direction in 8 months, then we furlough, then snap back, and then bankruptcy. It appears to me UA and the Union came up with a plan to keep pilots on property until summer, hoping travel demand will increase dramatically after a vaccine, hence the snap-back provisions. If demand remains low (500k yesterday), most of us are screwed anyway. I’ll continue to study the TA, and come here to read about what you guys think. Undecided...
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:25 PM
  #93  
New Hire
 
Joined: Sep 2020
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by HercDrvr88
Simple yes for me.
2 furloughs under my belt, thrown to the wolves and felt pretty abandoned by our union, so if there is a chance that all the friends I helped get hired here in the last couple years get a “choice”, something is better than nothing for my fellow United pilots.

When I came off my second furlough, I wasn’t really interested in racking up hours as a 14 year veteran pretty close to still being a probationary pilot....yeah,, so for my first 4 years back, I only averaged 33hrs/month...so 50-60 hrs a month doesn’t sound bad at all. Less total pay, sure, but if I have learned anything, it is this...create multiple cash flow streams and don’t ever depend on the airlines to meet all of your needs...stocks, rental homes, a side business...more time to develop your million dollar idea or have more quality time...looking forward to some international travel once things open up...oh yeah, and I grabbed a $100k out of my United 401k, thank you CARES Act and get to invest it somewhere else.
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:36 PM
  #94  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
From: B-737 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by duvie
I guess I’ve made peace with the next few years sucking pretty bad if you were on the bottom 40% of a legacy airline. to me, this is more about what things look like 2 to 3 years from now.

if demand stays suppressed at under 60% levels, thus giving us the MPG‘s you stated, the double furloughees and senior bottom third guys who are very frustrated about a pay cut have a lot more to worry about than lower MPG… As an upper lower third guy, I think you’ve got to look a little further out than the next 6 to 8 months.

again, totally get it if you are a senior BES top 2/3 person. This concretely means a pay cut for you. For the rest of us… A little game-theory (if-then many scenarios three to four moves) about the future and napkin math would suggest this is the lesser of many evils
I do not disagree. Just pointing out that we are at 40% of last year’s block hours and therefore the pay cuts are waaay deeper than the 10% you were peddling. More like 14/26/50%. But this agreement does spread the pain in a way that honors seniority, keeps peeps on property and mostly in their seats ready to roll IF/WHEN this nightmare scenario ends. I’m impressed. The alternative is more displacements/furloughs....because they are (were) coming.
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:37 PM
  #95  
New Hire
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by duvie
It’s very possible I’m reading it wrong, but I am seeing a 63 hour mpg if we are above 50% of our block hours for a given bid period. 10% of 70 hrs MPG = 7, so unless we dip below 50% block hours, in which case many more than 3900 of us are f-ed, I’m seeing a 10% cut. Obviously the lines are to be slimmer than usual, but that is going to be the case either way.

if you are senior in your BES and were not displaced, I could totally understand a NO vote… If you are in the top 2/3rds and got a displacement letter, I’m having a hard time seeing how this is a net negative in pay for (the proverbial) you.

Please tell me if I’ve got that wrong. I’m trying to understand the implications for the entire group

I'm in the middle 2/3 as you described with a displacement award to the 787. Under the LOA, I would be getting 52hrs at roughly $280/hr which equals $14,560 /mo. Without the LOA , and displaced, I would be getting around 75 hrs at roughly $240/ hr which equals $18,000. So under the LOA that's an approximate loss of $3440 per month. Is there somthing I missed in this equation?
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:39 PM
  #96  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,512
Likes: 0
From: 787 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by duvie
You guys do recognize that the alternative is all displacements stand, and the LPAs are in the toilet right? So there are going to be massive pay cuts with or without this LOA.

It seems like some people think we are choosing between this LOA and pre-Covid life…
Not true. LPAs will be 74-82 per current contract with MPG 70/73.
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:45 PM
  #97  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Midwaysmasher
I'm in the middle 2/3 as you described with a displacement award to the 787. Under the LOA, I would be getting 52hrs at roughly $280/hr which equals $14,560 /mo. Without the LOA , and displaced, I would be getting around 75 hrs at roughly $240/ hr which equals $18,000. So under the LOA that's an approximate loss of $3440 per month. Is there somthing I missed in this equation?
You are correct
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:48 PM
  #98  
bottoms up's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
15M Airline Miles
50 Countries Visited
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
From: non reclining seat
Default

Originally Posted by Midwaysmasher
I'm in the middle 2/3 as you described with a displacement award to the 787. Under the LOA, I would be getting 52hrs at roughly $280/hr which equals $14,560 /mo. Without the LOA , and displaced, I would be getting around 75 hrs at roughly $240/ hr which equals $18,000. So under the LOA that's an approximate loss of $3440 per month. Is there somthing I missed in this equation?
Only it’s for 24 months regardless if they furlough after 8 months or not.
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 05:50 PM
  #99  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Sep 2020
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Default

Seems like a win/win deal to me. The pilots win in the short term by delaying the furlough’s until June and the company wins in the long term by getting a concessionary contract with the pilots paying for most of the cost of the delayed furlough. Then after June they get their furlough and keep the money from the ALV for 24 months. Then again it could be a lose/lose depending on you’re point of view. Company loses until June. Pilots lose for years. I’m a glass half full guy so lest say win/win!
Reply
Old 09-16-2020 | 06:16 PM
  #100  
duvie's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,246
Likes: 0
From: WB Bunkie
Default

Originally Posted by Midwaysmasher
I'm in the middle 2/3 as you described with a displacement award to the 787. Under the LOA, I would be getting 52hrs at roughly $280/hr which equals $14,560 /mo. Without the LOA , and displaced, I would be getting around 75 hrs at roughly $240/ hr which equals $18,000. So under the LOA that's an approximate loss of $3440 per month. Is there somthing I missed in this equation?
my assumption is that if we are at sub 40% hours next spring/summer (the 52 MPG), everybody at UAL should be making plans outside aviation. and you won’t be at WB pay for long. I’d make your calculations based on NB pay if you think sub 50% block hours are likely next spring.

If we are at 55% which I think is more likely for late spring, you’re at $17,640. Once we hit 57.5%, you’re above your displaced number.

this is my basic premise, that I don’t really understand how people are not acknowledging. If we continue to be on the low end of the mpg table, as many people are using to evaluate their pay if this passes, our airline is in deep deep trouble. So, I guess I don’t understand a scenario where we’re at 50% or less and guys think the airline will keep trucking along with even 8,000 pilots. So, If 5,000+ furloughs happen, game-changer is an understatement. the pay a 2/3rd pilot and anyone under 5,000 system seniority should be evaluating isn’t WB pay, but NB.

again, I urge people to actually go through the motions of looking at what will actually be happening at UAL if we are still experiencing the block hour numbers that people are bandying about when looking at the AIP MPG table
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jetlag q
PSA Airlines
55
08-24-2018 12:40 PM
Hflyr51
Flight Schools and Training
11
06-25-2018 03:30 AM
KC10 FATboy
Safety
26
02-27-2017 03:27 PM
Slick111
Regional
1
05-16-2014 03:25 PM
Senior Skipper
GoJet
96
08-08-2012 05:12 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



Your Privacy Choices