Have never subjected my passengers or crew to that situation but I sure appreciate your approval to handle situations as I see fit, I feel much better now, thx.

Obviously I have no specific knowledge of the incident, BUT I am quite familiar with captains that share his viewpoint. I've had captains try to bully and belittle me to agree with their viewpoint. It doesn't work. Although I'm an FO, I have a good sense of what deferrals are appropriate and which are not. Lambourne is free to make any decision for himself, BUT he must still consider the opinions of at least one more pilot. Believe it or not (;)) I've had to be the one to step up and shut down a bad sequence of decisions. I can detect the attitude very quickly.

That's all you have to come back with? This has gone from a chest thumping, money grubbing pilot who was called on the carpet to your pleasure by elevating me to the position of King of Tacit Approval Dispensation?

Hopefully those who support removal of trips with pay loss (and i'm not saying you do syd111) when they refuse an aircraft won't be upset when they refuse a plane only to watch Glenn Quagmire pull away from the gate on their refused jet with bonus pay. But then again, maybe they have never refused a jet. Giggity giggity!

Thats why I call it a crew decision, hopefully you don't have to many that do not include you in the decision.

Yep thats all I have, and yes I have refused more than one a/c.

Bless you my son. Now let us go forth and secure thy JCBA. Be good.

Thank you Father!

Sure would like to secure the JCBA

I think this statement is exactly the point! As the Captain, I am authorized by the FAA to handle the situation as I see fit, with thoughtful input from the rest of my crew. L's giddiness over the company wanting to dock flight pay, render punishment, etc. does NOTHING but undermine that responsibility. I'm frankly appalled that a line pilot would publicly advocate for that just because he gets frustrated that we have a few bad apples who try to game the system. What's next, do we want the CSR to decide who gets the jumpseat? Do we want the Flight Managers to tell us that we aren't too fatigued to fly? If L wants to volunteer to have the Flight Office approve of all his decisions fine, but I'd prefer he leave me out of it.

By the way.... Since we've fully thread drifted away from the EFB's:

Does anyone have that document that ALPA put out a few years ago about their stance on what systems equipment they recommend we do NOT take? I BELIEVE, but can't remember for sure, that no APU at night or in IMC was on that list.

I lost mine, and would sure like to have it for guidance.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/ual/Deskto...cumentID=19676

Starts about page 27 and runs through 34. Enjoy

************************************************** ***
Unfortunately you're right. I will. The CAPT'S who KNOW their business?
their word is Gold. If it's Broke to THEM? Then I need to get Busy in a Hurry! But the Guys/Gals who don't have a clue? (and you can tell that in the first 10 seconds of the call) You almost "dismiss" them out of hand and it's wrong because they could have a valid point if NOT for the Attitude they brought with it! The "top shelf" Captains? Never have attitudes. they know their business and they're talking business. The "Gunslingers" call you like they Know their business and in fact don't know much at all but they're ready to tell YOU what's wrong with the airplane!
And they do it with an Attitude as if we're going to be impressed.. We're not.. Because if they know all THAT? Then why call US?? Just make the LGDATA entry and we'll call a mechanic. That's the difference between a Federal Marshall and a "Beat Cop" in "Mayberry".

That works fine if I'm at a UAL maintenance station. Unfortunately for all of us, UAL Management has decimated your ranks so more and more of the time I'm met with an FBO mechanic, who may or may not be at all familiar with the jet he/she is working. In those cases, because its MY butt on the line, I watch with interest. With respect, but with interest.

Just so you know, there are plenty of mechanics with the same attitude you attribute to pilots.

That's the one! Got it, thanks. For those of you that haven't seen it:

8. The UAL-MEC is opposed to the dispatching of aircraft with an inoperative
generator under the following conditions:
a. Two engine aircraft from a UAL maintenance station. (April 2003)
b. B-767/757/A-319/320 (including the APU generator), unless the aircraft is
operated in day light hours and in visual meteorological conditions. (July
2001)

Your fondest wish has been granted.
...be careful what you wish for...:eek:

GONE??

If being "Gone" means that one still gets paid $600K/yr while accumulating $150K/yr in restricted stock for the next 24 months.....please sign me up for "GONE" package.

I guarentee in his new role as "Gone"/"None Executive".....he's doing a lot more than just sitting idle while whispering sweet nothings in Jeffery's ear during this process.

Exactly. One only needs to view a clip of Glenn and Jeff getting grilled before congress a few months back. It will become very obvious as to who is running this ship.

There is NO DOUBT that Jeff's ego alone will only allow Glenn to do "but so much", that I can assure you. Jeff is one of the most egotistical individuals that I have heard speak while being at CAL. At least when Gordo was screwing you, he at least told you so straight up......Jeff on the other-hand.....typical M&A persona all the way......prepare.

If "UAL" in the post merged life really wanted Glenn "GONE", 'they' would have pulled out their check-books and sent him "packing" with several "Zeros" after October 1st when the financial closing took place.....instead he is 'allowed' to stick around for 24 months and get more "milk off the teet"....things that make you go "hmmm"??

GONE??.....hardly.

That's exactly what I did as a Captain. I never had a discussion with anyone but my FO about an aircraft refusal, I just did it through Unimatic, ACARS or a short phone call to Dispatch. And I was never questioned by anyone about it, which was a good thing because the decision had been made and was not negotiable. If I was at a maintenance station, I'd call or go talk to the line mechanics to see what the real story was on how long it would take to fix. I'm sure at times there was some eye rolling going on, like when I refused one of the old Shuttle -300s for an inop forward lav. I was not willing to fly 133 pax and crew with one operative lav on a 3:45 leg from PHL to DEN. So we waited 45 minutes for another jet to arrive and swapped with that crew, as they had a shorter leg back to ORD.

Digging deeper, I should never have been put in that position to begin with. That jet came in from ORD with the lav deferred inop, and I guess no one knew or cared where it was going next. That's a systemic problem. It should have been fixed at ORD before being flown to outstations. Not to mention that the old Shuttle jets with fewer lavs and no galleys should not have been assigned to longer legs like that. Moot point now.

It's a fact that UAL MX is grossly under-resourced, and senior management is obviously responsible for that. IMO, UAL abuses the MEL. It should be used to get a jet from a station where it can't be fixed to one where it can, not flown around for a week in and out of large maintenance bases.

When I write up a jet, I never try to tell MX what the cause of the problem is. You guys are the experts and will find the cause, I just report the symptoms as accurately as possible. I ask you to give Captains that kind of professional courtesy when they refuse a jet.

"Top Shelf Captain"? Is that what the FA's refer to the one who picks up check at the hotel bar on layovers?

Wish all Capt's were that way. Now imagine you are an FO and have to draw the line saying I'm not flying with issue "x".

That's why I left voluntarily. I don't need that kind of issue on a daily basis.

And, it was when I left with "aircraft shopping" going on daily.

In other words, which crew is trying to get home and will accept an aircraft with x, y, or z deferral to get home.................

Frats,
Lee

Maybe instead of drawing a line that I am not flying with issue x, you tried or maybe you did try to just let him know why you don't want to go with a certain problem. Explain it discuss it and work out the situation, the way you wrote it here is sounds like you did not even attemp to work out the problem. Could be he is missing something or you are missing something and you discuss the problem work it out one way or another as opposed to the line in the sand.

As far as the rest of your statement come on all that happening on a daily basis? A little over dramatic maybe. I know some of this happens but to you on a daily basis so you left?

Okay , I have to ask. What do "you" as Sam expect to hear from a Captain when he calls to regarding a maintenance issue, intends to refuse an airplane, and is put on the company party line?

************************************************** ******
Just tell us WHAT the refusal is for and call it a day. None of the Controllers is going to try and Sell ANY Captain, a "Pig in a poke" .
Only the Captain know His/Her Limitations and it's not up to Me nor any other controller to Judge them. Getting an "attitude" isn't going to do ONe damn thing to that airplane. But "copping" an attitude Wilth a controller?
Might make him Less inclined to work with you when there's a Grey area.
EVERY Controller knows What CAN be deferred. Where we differ is? Should it BE deferred and might this come to Bite ME in the Butt later on?? Does this Deferred Have history? What efforts were made to fix it? Were the efforts Sufficient "in good faith" TO fix it? Is this Where I need to get involved and start "DRIVING this Heap" to get it fixed to MY satisfaction?? (and I can tell you, MY satisfaction is HIGH!)
As controllers we can "drop the Hammer" (with justification) On ANY airplane at ANY time. We also Know what's LEGAL.. And Because any Captain doesn't like it Doesn't make it any LESS legal So Many times it comes down to YOUR Character. Like my "Favorite" Capt. Dru. The Nicest Pain in the ASS I've ever met. Always personable, Always polite, And ALWAYS Deadly because He KNOWS His Business.. It's a challenge just to talk to him. But it's ALWAYS an Experience!!

It's called "aircraft shopping" at UAL in 2008.

In other words, aircraft routers would push aircraft to another crew, or 2, or 3, to find their taker.

True, there are some mx issues that happen that are acceptable to flight "a" but not flight "b".

Trust me, it happened more times than I care to remember. Especially the go home flight. Think the routers/schedulers didn't know your schedule?

Yes, I did advocate in a respectful manner. Then, the line was drawn in the sand as I didn't care when safety is an issue. If I get home a day late because of it...I still got home.

Perhaps you should take the same approach.....

Frats,
Lee

Well after 25 years at ual and 28 in the airline industry I understand aircraft shopping I just have not seen it on a daily basis like you made it sound. I also have not seen the Captains you made it sound like you had to stand up to on a daily basis.

As far as my approach I have always been comfortable with it and have never had a crewmember uncomfortable with our decsions. But are you trying to tell me I am unsafe and I should take the Lee approach? Is the Lee approach the final say in everything.

Come on and give us all a break with your attitude of doing it better than everyone else. You sound a bit like a drama queen. Can we count on you staying on the voluntary furlough list?

I never said you were unsafe. A little defensive aren't you. My point is that there were many crews that accepted legal deferrals without giving adequate consideration to the safety of a deferral pertaining to their flight. Routers weren't and dispatchers were prohibited from being pro-active requiring crews to turn down the aircraft.

As you've probably heard, there is a difference between the WB world and the LCO. Your view from the left seat in the WB world is a little bit different from at least what was once going on.

Here's a great one I remember, DEN RNO, night, marginal enroute and arrival weather (TS), one pack deferred (alt restricted), other pack recurring history of recent pac ovht's with numerous pac ctlr resets as "corrective action", mountainous, terrain, etc. Acft twice declined, acft at a mx base, our original acft already given to one of the crews who declined our new acft. End of a long day. End of the DEN depts for the day. No spare acft.

Capt wanted to press with it. After discussion on many factors, he reconsidered. Flight canx.

Here's another, SFO IAD, red-eye, nice evening, no FWD LAV. Real common sense by the acft routers! Capt thought we should press. Not.

I didn't mean to imply it happened on every day of each trip. It wasn't uncommon, however, for such examples to occur once a trip on the LCO. So it was happening much to often system wide IMO.

I'm trying to remember the highest number of orange stickers on an aircraft I flew. Suffice it to say that the lower ECAM screen one day was surrounded by orange stickers with more on the over head panel. Probably not something an ETOPS aircraft has to deal with to any great extent.

Your personal attack aside, whether I choose to return to UAL if offered a recall. will be based on my terms. Just like my decision to depart was.

Besides, if I do return, I won't see the right seat of a triple 7 until you are hopefully long retired! What are you worried about? That you might have an FO that will advocate. Great CRM there, chief.

May you have many more safe years flying at UAL.

Frats,
Lee

On a daily basis was what was said in your original post, at that time I was flying the 757/767 mostly domestic and there was some of thos e issues on occasion and if you know your a/c and it's limitations you make an informed decision as a crew and accept or turn it down, not really that complicated. However for you to state that it was happening to you on a daily basis and you don't need that on a daily basis and that is why you left seems a bit dramatic.

By the way I like having a fo that advocates, but in your post all the drawing a line in the sand and all that and again sounding like you did this everyday sounded like a bunch of bull ****. Yes I know it happens but not like you are talking about with you doing it on a daily basis.

best of luck.

Best of lusk to you!:)

And seriously, hope you guys get a JCBA in the near future. However, given the mediation and what I believe (rightfully so IMO) a stalemate on section one scope, the quicker you guys can get to the 30 day cooling off, the better. Not gonna be anytime soon, but sadly the process has to run it's course.

Best of luck to you!

Frats,
Lee

Agreed and I do believe I know Capt Dru. Happy Holidays.

Perhaps being an outsider you are not privy to the information that ALPA is doling out at the domiciles and layover locations. ALPA says there are 1+billion reasons the company wants to come to terms on an agreement. Appears there can be an agreement between the company and ALPA. The UA/CO MEC's have been able to get together on the issues of pay (no they didn't say what those terms were) and are ready to get a joint contract. The mediation will be filed for and that is part of the process. The MEC Officer speaking seemed to think things were great. I think you being on the outside is a detriment to your ACTUAL knowledge of what is taking place.

Enjoy your time away. Perhaps you should enjoy some time away from proselytizing on an issue you really have no accurate information on. ALPA said they are not putting in print what is being shared at meetings as they want this to be a face to face, we are doing something, sort of adventure.

L

L,

In the conversation(s) you are referring to, did the MEC member say that negotiations would continue while the NMB was brought up to speed, or are we basically in holding until whoever gets assigned is fully briefed?

Thanks

He said progress was being made with the company negotiators. The mediator would be involved as agreed to in the TA. The impression he gave was the negotiations would continue after the first of the year. From what I gathered asking for mediation doesn't actually mean we get one right away. So to answer your question, yes they will continue to negotiate while a mediator is chosen and briefed.

He said expect the contract by summer and the SLI by this time next December. They said they were not putting this stuff in print as the words the MEC puts out are dissected by all parties and not always in a positive way.



L

L,

I think you did just put it in print :)

Hope you/they are correct. Heck, maybe they'll just tell the NMB folks on day one, "just kidding," you can go home now.

That would be great news for all involved taking a timeline like you mentioned previously. I'll be the first to say job well done and thumbs up.

Looking forward to reading the TA announcement this summer. Check back with you then. Until then, one question, the 1 billion you mentioned is I'm assuming net gain after the cost of all the JCBA's. Guess the contract is going to be something because that is only half the amount of "synergy" mgmt spouted pre-merger if memory serves.

Frats,
Lee

All I can say about this timeline is that they better start recalls right after the Holidays. I can feel the love comming on for this summer.

The big difference is I'm not an mec official. If I print what was heard there is wiggle room for the MEC I suppose. The guys were in several cities spreading the word. A friend was in Tokyo at the downtown layover hotel and ALPA was there. Guess that is where my assessment is going. Giving MEC members TYO vacations. At least the guys I talked to were in a domicile.

Yes the billion dollar number was net. Also they said the company was making money and the sooner they combined the better monetarily for the corporation. Supposedly the finance consultant we are paying from the assessment is positive too on the contract. But, ALPA consultants have a history of selling us a pig in a poke.

L

You sure you wish to make that statement? You might want to reconsider Capt Kent.

Or better yet call your rep. Get the facts before you react
L

Nothing gets done easy.

Is this the ipad thread?
 

From a blastmail sent today from EWR ACP Capt. Mike Bowers:


1. EFB/Ipad Update: As I mentioned on a previous blastmail we are looking at using IPads. I was under the impression that the IPads would be replacing the EFB's, but that does not seem to be the case. Here is what I am hearing now.

The Ipad or a device like it will be issued to each individual pilot later this year in order to be used to store AFM, FOM, training manuals etc. We may issue charts to these devices also. They are for use outside the flight deck, but may also be used in the flight deck to reference a manual such as a AFM or FOM. They are not to be used to view charts in the flight deck. The EFBs i.e. Class two EFBs will continue to be installed in all B757 aircraft and the B767 aircraft. The B767 is delayed as the maintenance schedule for those is really spread out as the installs are done on heavy checks. We will be updating the EFB software shortly as we have received the approval of the new software from the AEG so we just need to obtain local FAA Ops approval. We will be seeking FAA approval to use the Ipad-like devices to back-up the aircraft EFBs, that is if a EFB becomes inop in flight then the Ipad-like device may be used to view charts. We have completed an assessment of approx eight different units and the Ipad is looking the best of all these "tablet PCs", Jeppesen is working on the back end of the software in order to support the devices. We will know more early in January.

Shall we name a few names on the ALPA consultants. Not necessary. We both know who they are.

It's good to hear. Read a "magenta line" that is a significant shift from previous one's IMO. Looks like that unified front may be developed. Bravo.

Perhaps there are external forces on the company pushing them towards achieving the end game of integration sooner rather than later. I can only postulate that an external influence may by default be helping the overall cause now that the MEC's are playing nice together.

One can wonder. I can see the "Labor Strategy" department (that might be HR in other nice companies) coming up with a plan for full frontal attack, 70 seat CAL code share, JV's etc., knowing if they go through, great, if they don't, minimal loss, but at least we showed a strong hand. At the same time, they are getting pressure from whatever entity to push through to fruition and completely consummate the merger. The company's hope, they showed a strong hand (bluffed with minimal risk) while hopefully got the pilots to blink and reduce their expectations.

Negotiating 101: negotiate from a position of power (even if you don't really have it).

BTW, I do get and read all the ALPA emails. I was aware of the station visits.



Frats,
Lee

What is the status of EFB's/iPads?