Search

Notices

It's Done

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-13-2020 | 07:38 AM
  #51  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
From: SFO Guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by BenTover
Remind me again who’s bearing the cost for the migrant workers to sit around and watch the crops grow?

You’re missing the point. Reserves get pounded in the summer and winter holiday season. Other months they are utilized less. The company would benefit from lower MPGs. Anyone remember when the company opened the Bus domicile in IAH? A ton of people sat reserve waiting for the flying to ramp up. What about when they opened the 87 in IAD? Again, a bunch sat around on reserve while others endured horrid lines. How would those pilots made out if the company had the benefit of a low MPG?

You guys love those high furlough numbers. I’m surprised you haven’t thrown in the rumors of closing hubs that were being pushed during and before the vote. Delta just announced they have $21,000,000,000 in liquidity and expect to be cash flow positive by next spring. I fully expect us to be in a similar position. Do you really think we are going to cripple this airline with mass furloughs when SWA is entering ORD and IAH if our burn rate is zero to positive? My guess is United will furlough 2000, maintain this agreement, and smile all the way to the bank.

We’ve been Variabilized.
Scott Kirby is not a Tilton or Smallsak!!! He is paying more for the privilege of having a lot of extra staffing just in case there are opportunities to pounce on. This LOA is costing the company more by about 20%. If Kirby wanted to do the short-term fiscally responsible thing, he would have just furloughed 4000-5000 pilots. He wants to make this airline the best it can be. He wants that to be his legacy.

If they had furloughed 4000-5000, many pilots in the middle of the middle tier would be on NB reserve for a while.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 07:39 AM
  #52  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 116
Default

Originally Posted by BenTover
Remind me again who’s bearing the cost for the migrant workers to sit around and watch the crops grow?

You’re missing the point. Reserves get pounded in the summer and winter holiday season. Other months they are utilized less. The company would benefit from lower MPGs. Anyone remember when the company opened the Bus domicile in IAH? A ton of people sat reserve waiting for the flying to ramp up. What about when they opened the 87 in IAD? Again, a bunch sat around on reserve while others endured horrid lines. How would those pilots made out if the company had the benefit of a low MPG?

You guys love those high furlough numbers. I’m surprised you haven’t thrown in the rumors of closing hubs that were being pushed during and before the vote. Delta just announced they have $21,000,000,000 in liquidity and expect to be cash flow positive by next spring. I fully expect us to be in a similar position. Do you really think we are going to cripple this airline with mass furloughs when SWA is entering ORD and IAH if our burn rate is zero to positive? My guess is United will furlough 2000, maintain this agreement, and smile all the way to the bank.

We’ve been Variabilized.
We are paying for the hourly wages, but the company is still on the hook for everything else such as retirement, training, taxes, and benefits. You criticize those who throw out high furlough numbers, but the doomsday no voters act like this is some permanent concession. Having liquidity available is one thing, paying the cost to utilize it is another. My guess is that if we do get our cash burn to zero and still furlough 2,000, the rest will be flying enough that the low values won’t be an issue. Having our cash burn eliminated will require pilots flying to generate that revenue. Hopefully we get there soon, the profitability triggers hit, we return to growth, and put this nightmare behind us.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 07:57 AM
  #53  
Viperstick's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Default

Kirby could NOT have furloughed 4000-5000 1 October. It would have decimated TK staffing and hamstrung retraining those left into proper fleet/seats. Once everyone is trained, the company will furlough to whatever level it needs based on demand. We may very well see 4000 furloughs next year, if demand dictates, because the training backlog will be solved (and because more senior instructors will be online by then). We paid, through previous contract negotiations, for having TK manned by seniority list pilots. Like furlough pay, RJ seat pulls, and LPA changes when pilots are on furlough, TK manning is meant to make furloughs more expensive for the company and thus act as a brake on the depth and speed of furloughs.

Kirby was holding a pair of twos and bluffed us to fold with a full house.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 08:00 AM
  #54  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
From: SFO Guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by Viperstick
Kirby could NOT have furloughed 4000-5000 1 October. It would have decimated TK staffing and hamstrung retraining those left into proper fleet/seats. Once everyone is trained, the company will furlough to whatever level it needs based on demand. We may very well see 4000 furloughs next year, if demand dictates, because the training backlog will be solved (and because more senior instructors will be online by then). We paid, through previous contract negotiations, for having TK manned by seniority list pilots. Like furlough pay, RJ seat pulls, and LPA changes when pilots are on furlough, TK manning is meant to make furloughs more expensive for the company.

Kirby was holding a pair of twos and bluffed us to fold with a full house.
I know that. But over six months, yes he could have. And definitely 2850 would be gone by year’s end. At least another 1000-1200 within another 3-4 months.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 08:10 AM
  #55  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by DashTrash
Scott Kirby is not a Tilton or Smallsak!!! He is paying more for the privilege of having a lot of extra staffing just in case there are opportunities to pounce on. This LOA is costing the company more by about 20%. If Kirby wanted to do the short-term fiscally responsible thing, he would have just furloughed 4000-5000 pilots. He wants to make this airline the best it can be. He wants that to be his legacy.

If they had furloughed 4000-5000, many pilots in the middle of the middle tier would be on NB reserve for a while.
I can’t decide.



or





no disrespect to Yasiel.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 08:28 AM
  #56  
Half wing's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 516
Likes: 3
From: 787 right
Default

Originally Posted by Viperstick
Kirby could NOT have furloughed 4000-5000 1 October. It would have decimated TK staffing and hamstrung retraining those left into proper fleet/seats. Once everyone is trained, the company will furlough to whatever level it needs based on demand. We may very well see 4000 furloughs next year, if demand dictates, because the training backlog will be solved (and because more senior instructors will be online by then). We paid, through previous contract negotiations, for having TK manned by seniority list pilots. Like furlough pay, RJ seat pulls, and LPA changes when pilots are on furlough, TK manning is meant to make furloughs more expensive for the company and thus act as a brake on the depth and speed of furloughs.

Kirby was holding a pair of twos and bluffed us to fold with a full house.
You are 100% correct about TK limiting furloughs and how we bought them time. You have officially been acknowledged so no need to repeat this over and over again going forward. The LOA also bought the pilots time before getting furloughed. I just don’t see any more than the 2000 getting furloughed next year. We would have easily cut 2850 by years end with no LOA. Of course you are also correct​​​​​​, the company could furlough 4000 pilots next year and we bought them to time to get everyone trained but the chance of that happening is slim.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 08:56 AM
  #57  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 116
Default

Originally Posted by Half wing
You are 100% correct about TK limiting furloughs and how we bought them time. You have officially been acknowledged so no need to repeat this over and over again going forward. The LOA also bought the pilots time before getting furloughed. I just don’t see any more than the 2000 getting furloughed next year. We would have easily cut 2850 by years end with no LOA. Of course you are also correct​​​​​​, the company could furlough 4000 pilots next year and we bought them to time to get everyone trained but the chance of that happening is slim.
They don’t need the same amount of time to furlough as when it is the normal 15- 20% recession. You don’t need to be as worried about training replacement when the demand for pilots is where it is now. With demand where it is now, they could have furloughed deeper than in the past and then played catch up later. I don’t know if we bought them time, or bought the 2,850 some time. Either way, I think that the total number that they could possibly furlough would be the same by next fall, with or without this agreement.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 09:20 AM
  #58  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
From: SFO Guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by BenTover
I can’t decide.



or





no disrespect to Yasiel.
Nope!!! It’s just math!!! It’s that simple!!! If you think for second that SK was not going to furlough deep, you have your head in sand. Hoping that the tornado doesn’t blow your a$$ away.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 09:24 AM
  #59  
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,209
Likes: 6
From: 777
Default

All this speculation is great fun, but even if we recover by the spring, the airline will be very different. We haven't seen an airline like what we will have--ever, maybe not since we gave up the original scope with the RJ's.

My point being, with the LOA, the changes in scope will drastically change who is flying the smaller markets. A lot more flying will come back to mainline, if the small stuff recovers. The Express carriers will be hit hard, especially while we try to recover being a smaller airline. There won't be new jobs for a long time. Which also means, the lower PBS awards will be with us for quite a while. Budget accordingly.
Reply
Old 10-13-2020 | 09:41 AM
  #60  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 116
Default

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
All this speculation is great fun, but even if we recover by the spring, the airline will be very different. We haven't seen an airline like what we will have--ever, maybe not since we gave up the original scope with the RJ's.

My point being, with the LOA, the changes in scope will drastically change who is flying the smaller markets. A lot more flying will come back to mainline, if the small stuff recovers. The Express carriers will be hit hard, especially while we try to recover being a smaller airline. There won't be new jobs for a long time. Which also means, the lower PBS awards will be with us for quite a while. Budget accordingly.
I think that COVID will change the industry, not just United. The fact that the 50 seat fleet is getting old with no real replacement, and also that they are hated by our customers helps our cause. I’d love to see more 737-700/319’s, or even better, new A220’s serving the medium markets while the 50 seaters go away and the smallest markets get the 76 seaters. I’d really love to see the regionals get gutted and the legacy airlines take back flying, but I don’t expect that to happen any time soon on any large scale.
Reply

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