Originally Posted by UALManager

What option are you for that gives you more? Where are you going to shift more from?

do you think the company is going to offer more? We are not.

do you see a lot of 1/3 and 2/3 guys willing to shift their burden and sacrificing more? You are so divided.

I see a whole lot of top 1/3 guys that are not even willing to stay home 10% more to get this through, and don’t care, recognize or accept what furloughs will happen if it fails.

I think if it fails SK has the leverage he needs to go another direction with the company rather than position for SnapBack and gaining or retaining market share. And you will have given it to him. in fact, he’s going to have few options with what kind of company we can be going forward. We won’t be a market share leader, and I imagine we will get absorbed (not absorb) into something else. IF WE ARE LUCKY. We won't absorb anyone with those books. SWA is hurting a little too but is filthy rich. SWA might just buy us to take the used 737's and domestic gates, and throw away the rest - including you! I can always find a new job though, easily even in this market. In fact, this whole experience has made my resume sawheeeeet. Not a lot up UM dudes that can put managing cash burn in a fortune 100 company on their resume, and making the P&L projections hum like a fine tuned guitar. Some industries lagged transportation, and will value my skills here soon when they start to decline. How hard is it for you to switch jobs back and forth...ouch!

We'll have to stop the cash burn. Guess who is target #1 for that right now. The shareholders and just sanity demands it.

Business school day 1, my first quiz question was - if you have a $25M a day cash burn, do you:
A) reduce unnecessary labor costs and become more efficient?
B) Just find more cash hidden in the couch?
C) Generate more revenue that doesn't exist?
D) Give your labor the pony they want while firing managers?

We will furlough to balance the levels in line with the other groups, including management. Do you know how many of us are gone or are training their overseas replacement?

even if they wanted to recover it’ll take years to retrain 3-5000 at 5-700 a year max. You are right though. TK is problematic, but we gots the brain cells to figure it out. We are young and smart.

your union reps did not divide you. They are Smart enough the recognize how divided some already were and are trying to find ways if us coming together to avoid everything falling apart.

there's no option C with full MPG, a pony and a back rub. The company does not need you if you are 3900 or below. They don’t care about your bills or your mortgage, you are preaching to the choir on that one, both because they are sacking managers and sending their jobs to India and because the company is losing millions a day. Your Labor is not profitable or even valuable and won’t be for a long time. However, you are lucky in that the value you bring (quick industry SnapBack and recovery) is something they want and are willing to pay for, just not anywhere near full pay.

Face the reality Big 5, if you are 3900 (and really below 5000) or below you are economically worthless to the company. Worthless. Can I say that again? Worthless. Except for one thing
- a possible snapback. Moreso, you are a burden. You demoralize the rest of us with your whining and waste money. Daddy is losing his job, and you are crying for a pony while Daddy is offering you a dollhouse that he even can't afford just to maaayyyybe try to keep the house in order in case he can convince Mommy to come back home and not divorce him. Daddy wants to be ready in case he gets a chance with Mommy again soon, because with Mommy out of the house, Uncle A and Cousin D, and rich brother SWA are getting their suits dry cleaned for when Mommy wants to party again. If daddy moves into the mobile home and his bratty kid won't stop throwing tantrums, Mommy is gone for good.

Good luck with the pony!

Originally Posted by biggun

That really is the problem. "shift more" is essentially code talk for "Rob from the senior and give to the junior." It's the same as the democrats saying "make the rich pay." or make the corporation pay more taxes to fund our social programs."

After you boil it all down, it's shifting money from one group to another group so you can afford to fully staff and fund that bottom third seniority group.

Management doesn't care who pays their payrole. Just as long as it's not management. They are fine with pilots self-funding their pay and benefits.

We must be the laughing stock of ALPA to come up with an LOA that takes our senior pilots out back and shoots them in the head like some old cow that needed to be culled from the herd.

What's up with these millennials. Didn't we fund up a furlough fund? Don't we have pilots on property who have been furloughed multiple times? No way they vote for this.

I may be wrong, but I see "no confidence" votes coming for the MEC and many LEC reps.

Originally Posted by EWRflyr

And how close are you to the top of that bottom group? Company has indicated they are likely to furlough up to 3,900 by next year. This TA will likely retire another 655 pilots. If you are that close, you are likely to move up into the next tier after retirements accounted for so the MPG cut wouldn’t be what you stated.

Originally Posted by BJXFlyer

I thought the same thing until someone pointed out D.5. and I.1.c, which indicate takers of P-VSL 2 will remain in the staffing snapshot for two years, or age 65.

D.5. The Pilot shall remain on the P-VSL-2 and remain a United employee until the earliest of:
(1) the end of the October 2022 Bid Period (plus any additional period equal to the period
by which the start of the Pilot’s P-VSL-2 was delayed); (2) the date prior to his or her
sixty-fifth (65th) birthday; or (3) the date prior to an early retirement date, as contained in
a submission from the Pilot of early retirement notice. Upon the termination of his P-VSL-
2 the Pilot shall be retired from United.

I.1.c. Except for (1) Pilots awarded a Voluntary Separation Leave prior to date of signing,
who shall be permanently excluded from group membership, and (2) Pilots who will
reach the mandatory retirement age between the snapshot date and the first day of
the succeeding quarter, all Pilots on the seniority list at the time of the staffing
snapshot shall be included in group membership.

Originally Posted by MachJ

E?
E) learn from mistakes and carry less debt into the next downturn.

All the executives and directors should take a substantial paycut. Their bad driving exacerbated this situation and now they have their hands out begging for help.
You guys are playing checkers and they are playing chess. It's amazing there are even a handful of you who think this is a TA worth voting yes for. Please read Flying The Line and pay attention to how concessions worked out in the past before voting.

Originally Posted by horrido27

Don't you just love it when "someone" creates a screen name to help promote an agenda.. during these trying times.

Hay UALM-
**** Off

Motch

Originally Posted by biggun

That really is the problem. "shift more" is essentially code talk for "Rob from the senior and give to the junior." It's the same as the democrats saying "make the rich pay." or make the corporation pay more taxes to fund our social programs."

After you boil it all down, it's shifting money from one group to another group so you can afford to fully staff and fund that bottom third seniority group.

Management doesn't care who pays their payrole. Just as long as it's not management. They are fine with pilots self-funding their pay and benefits.

We must be the laughing stock of ALPA to come up with an LOA that takes our senior pilots out back and shoots them in the head like some old cow that needed to be culled from the herd.

What's up with these millennials. Didn't we fund up a furlough fund? Don't we have pilots on property who have been furloughed multiple times? No way they vote for this.

I may be wrong, but I see "no confidence" votes coming for the MEC and many LEC reps.

Originally Posted by duvie

the real misunderstanding you’re having however, is that this isn’t a zero-sum game. The point of the TA is that we are all doing better in a few years than we would be without this. To get there it involves senior people making an investment in the future. It’s a very real business concept. As I’ve said, it’s a gamble. So, i can’t tell you what this airline will look like in 5 years with this TA, but I can tell you what it won’t look like if SK furloughs 4,000+... and it doesn’t involve 3,000 number WB captains, and 40% seniority for NB CA and WB FO in the middle tier. I think very few will feel like they won in that scenario

Originally Posted by duvie

in your view millennials want to take for themselves, but that’s antithetical to senior guys/gals who don’t want to take for themselves? There isn’t a “me” generation, just humans being humans. And in this case, humans with more years of earning potential and less years.

the real misunderstanding you’re having however, is that this isn’t a zero-sum game. The point of the TA is that we are all doing better in a few years than we would be without this. To get there it involves senior people making an investment in the future. It’s a very real business concept. As I’ve said, it’s a gamble. So, i can’t tell you what this airline will look like in 5 years with this TA, but I can tell you what it won’t look like if SK furloughs 4,000+... and it doesn’t involve 3,000 number WB captains, and 40% seniority for NB CA and WB FO in the middle tier. I think very few will feel like they won in that scenario

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets

you keep throwing around the word millennial. You want to take a stab at how many millennial pilots we actually have? It’s not very many. But way to insult all those men and women who served our country and now find themselves with a furlough letter. Get over yourself.