was it a good idea then?

A small number (compared to the numbers today)had the path you described. Many(myself included) sat sideways during probation, learning the company procedures, and being mentored by senior Captains. The speed of upgrade for anyone who wants it, or doesn’t want it if the contact language plays out, is massive in scale. It’s not a bash on being new. It’s a common sense observation to rapid movement and upgrades. We shouldn’t be afraid to talk about it.

It's out. upa23.com

Presently the airline is trying to embrace two contrasting ideas at once. The first is that experience, leadership, mentorship, and extraordinary captains are critical to the success of their UN growth plans. The second is that any @$$ in the left seat of a UAL cockpit will do. I for one believe they are not concerning themselves enough with the goal of getting experienced aviators into those command/leadership positions.

The simple reality is that the current compensation structure of NBCA isn’t sufficient to attract the most tenured, experienced pilots we have. The airline could embrace the reality that more effectively tapping into our resource of experienced pilots will require paying a greater premium. Instead, they are trying to open the window of opportunity up to the opposite end of the experience spectrum. Concerns that we are taking a uniquely inexperienced cadre of first officers & coupling them with an increasingly inexperienced cadre of captains are justified. I sincerely hope it doesn’t result in a tragic learning experience.

Voting 94% would send no message at all. It doesn't work that way. If the goal from management was a 50%+1 contract then they screwed up royally.

By the time the next contract comes along nobody will care about what the vote was on the old contract, just like the vote on the last contract (Mid-Term Wage Agreement) didn't affect this outcome one bit.

At first glance I may be eating some crow on this. 8-F-12 sure looks like forced upgrades is the intent. (Or at least a possibility.)

The USAF has been doing this for years. Sq's are getting younger and younger. Lt's are commanding/instructing other Lt's. The services aren't without their missteps but it has been working. The gaps are being filled and the mission continues. sts.

Every bad idea works right up to the moment it doesn’t. ​TEM 101: more threats = more errors = more UAS = more accidents. We operate 5,000 flights a day so it can go right a whole lot of times and still go wrong once, but once is all it takes. The idea is we’re supposed to recognize & respond to threats, not minimize their significance simply because “they haven’t caused an accident yet”.

​​​​​​We’re lobbying congress not to relax experience requirements while we turn around & promote less experienced cockpits. Math doesn’t add up to me.

That said I don’t think the military has gone a year without putting someone in the ground for a long time. Some of it is mx related. A lot of it isn’t.

I had an uncle with a high school diploma who was landing airplanes with bullet holes in them at 20.... He lived to 93....