Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
United Airlines plans to slow growth in 23 >

United Airlines plans to slow growth in 23

Search
Notices

United Airlines plans to slow growth in 23

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-22-2022, 06:36 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Position: Gear slinger
Posts: 2,923
Default

Originally Posted by unstabilized View Post
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/07/20/united-airlines-ual-2q-2022-earnings.html

Quite a big cutback for 2023. Wonder how this will impact hiring.
They talk about their hiring plans in their earnings call.
Otterbox is offline  
Old 07-22-2022, 06:40 AM
  #12  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Sep 2020
Posts: 14
Default

Originally Posted by unstabilized View Post
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/07/20/united-airlines-ual-2q-2022-earnings.html

Quite a big cutback for 2023. Wonder how this will impact hiring.
In the earnings call, Nocella CCO, quantified the 12-point decrease (8% vs 20% previous guide) in capacity growth. 4-5 points of it is reduced regional flying because of regional staffing issues and treated as an acceleration of the United Next plan (does not affect 2026 ASMs). Another 4-5 points was a deferral of expected widebody flying as Asia and other markets (Russian overfly) are not expected to resume in the near future.

With that clarification, it's not as scary as the headline. Hopefully, we can get those widebodies back flying on lower CASM routes with higher RASMs soon. Boeing shifting the delivery timeline on the Max 10 is probably the greatest threat to the growth plan. Mentioned they are committed to 200 new hires a month.
31LatKE is offline  
Old 07-22-2022, 06:45 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 536
Default

Next is based mostly on dash 10

boeing is the cause of the large drop
Gooselives is offline  
Old 07-22-2022, 06:13 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 647
Default

Originally Posted by 31LatKE View Post
In the earnings call, Nocella CCO, quantified the 12-point decrease (8% vs 20% previous guide) in capacity growth. 4-5 points of it is reduced regional flying because of regional staffing issues and treated as an acceleration of the United Next plan (does not affect 2026 ASMs). Another 4-5 points was a deferral of expected widebody flying as Asia and other markets (Russian overfly) are not expected to resume in the near future.

With that clarification, it's not as scary as the headline. Hopefully, we can get those widebodies back flying on lower CASM routes with higher RASMs soon. Boeing shifting the delivery timeline on the Max 10 is probably the greatest threat to the growth plan. Mentioned they are committed to 200 new hires a month.
and considering we are 7% below 2019 flying levels getting to 8% above 2019 is still a big move.
C11DCA is offline  
Old 07-25-2022, 03:50 AM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 606
Default

It sounds like hiring around 200/month will continue into the foreseeable future then. Where does that leave United with hiring for retirements? How much of the espoused hiring plans is for retirements vs. United Next?
Voski is offline  
Old 07-25-2022, 04:56 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 392
Default

Originally Posted by iahflyr View Post
Not exactly. A labor shortage at a restaurant that can’t find enough minimum wage employees is a pay shortage.

A labor shortage of trained pilots on a given fleet is not a pay shortage. Not when thousands of pilots would give anything to be in that seat…
Maybe. Let’s use an extreme example. If a UAL new hire FO was paid $1 million a year, you’d have people quit their jobs and get 1500 hours ASAP.

Not to mention all the corporate pilots who would now clamor for an interview.

What we are seeing is the result of 20 years of low wages, especially in entry level jobs, that didn’t incentivize people to become pilots.
jumppilot is offline  
Old 07-25-2022, 05:00 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 963
Default

Originally Posted by jumppilot View Post
Maybe. Let’s use an extreme example. If a UAL new hire FO was paid $1 million a year, you’d have people quit their jobs and get 1500 hours in a year.

What we are seeing is the result of 20 years of low wages that didn’t incentivize people to become pilots.
So pilots should be like any other slowly responding supply. Price spike baby! Bubble territory would be 3x or more, but I think what we'll see is a doubling of wages within the next two years. This is a conservative estimate. If lumber can do it. WE CAN TOO!!!
fadec is offline  
Old 07-25-2022, 06:05 PM
  #18  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: Transition
Posts: 72
Default

Originally Posted by fadec View Post
So pilots should be like any other slowly responding supply. Price spike baby! Bubble territory would be 3x or more, but I think what we'll see is a doubling of wages within the next two years. This is a conservative estimate. If lumber can do it. WE CAN TOO!!!
Umm, no we can’t. Because out of 14000 there are enough who will ALWAYS pick up PPU and bail the CS out. It’s a great dream but then wake up and see the same ******* different day. Just the way it works. Wish it was different but that is the reality.
DC462 is offline  
Old 07-26-2022, 08:58 AM
  #19  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 309
Default

Originally Posted by DC462 View Post
Umm, no we can’t. Because out of 14000 there are enough who will ALWAYS pick up PPU and bail the CS out. It’s a great dream but then wake up and see the same ******* different day. Just the way it works. Wish it was different but that is the reality.
I agree we are our worse enemy but I don’t think the PPU picker uppers are the biggest problem. I ran into a guy the other day who said we don’t want to kill the airline like the UAL Contract 2000 killed United. 🤦‍♂️ I guess gross mismanagement in all other areas wasn’t an issue for this guy.
Mitch Rapp is offline  
Old 07-26-2022, 06:33 PM
  #20  
New Hire
 
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 4
Default

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp View Post
I agree we are our worse enemy but I don’t think the PPU picker uppers are the biggest problem. I ran into a guy the other day who said we don’t want to kill the airline like the UAL Contract 2000 killed United. 🤦‍♂️ I guess gross mismanagement in all other areas wasn’t an issue for this guy.
9/11 was what killed UAL, not Contract 2000. Government $ was allocated for airlines but UAL never got a penny, despite being directly, tragically impacted. My understanding is that DAL somehow convinced the US government that we shouldn’t get any financial assistance.
UAL3x is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
iahflyr
United
3
10-18-2018 10:46 AM
Cruise
Spirit
10507
12-01-2016 12:52 PM
Boeing Aviator
United
9
11-25-2016 12:58 PM
EWRflyr
United
44
04-26-2014 05:07 AM
Rotor2prop
Major
13
07-11-2012 10:55 AM

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