Monkeyfly

AirPiCen,

SOC is here, gonna combine the profiles page?

Here's a start:

320: 152
737: 238
747: 23
757: 157
767: 59
777: 74
787: (4 currently in assembly)

Total Pilots:
12385

Furloughed from UA:
1437

Bases:

CLE, DCA, DEN, EWR, GUM, IAH, JFK, LAX, ORD, SEA, SFO

Pay rates:

HSLD

Sorry if this isn't the answer you're looking for but we'll probably wait until the JCBA/SLI occurs before updating the profile page. The SOC was approved, but UniCon can't truly operates as a single carrier until they settle up with labor.

Monkeyfly

]
Agreed.

Looking forward to 201_...

Spicy McHaggis

Ah, an optimist....

strfyr51

************************************************** *******8
That SOC signoff has NOTHING to do with your SCOPE nor contract. UAL will do as it's ALWAYS done. Whether they choose to RESPECT your Contract and SCOPE? That's a "Horse of another color".. Don't get your hopes up.
You're at United Now and THINGS are Different!

13n144e

I actually agree with your first statement. I only pointed out that CAL was the surviving certificate to emphasize the fact that the scope section of our contract is still in effect and will remain so. It actually doesn't matter which is the surviving certificate, our contract still governs our flying. Period. Doesn't matter how much you capitalize, the rest of your post is your usual nonsense. I've seen no changes here at L-CAL other than a call sign. Same certificate, same checklists, same procedures, same Flight Ops management, same CEO...right down to the same paint job. Read Capt. Morse's recent comments concerning the lamentable CAL culture being imposed on L-UAL and she's absolutely correct; the few (and there weren't many) positive aspects of "CAL culture" died out long ago and I wouldn't want Jeffy's twisted version shoved down my throat either. But I certainly haven't had any one try to impose "United culture" here. Strfyr, I think your a little confused on the "merger of equals" concept, but it really doesn't matter. We will enforce our scope agreement whether UAL (or you) likes it or not.

Coach67

Maybe I'm not seeing it. Before they couldn't use a RJ70 with a CAL callsign between EWR and say CLE. Now with no CAL callsign ... can't they go ahead and do this with the UAL callsign despite the CAL scope language? It's the enforcement and monitoring issue that causes me concern and raises lots of questions.

gettinbumped

+1. This is what I'm anxious to see. I'm sure it will go back to arbitration. I'm worried about the result

bkaz

I'm not so sure there is a problem yet. Even though everyone is using the United call sign under one certificate, the company is still selling tickets on both United and Continental. A passenger can still purchase a ticket on Continental that includes a legs on Continental Connection, and the company is still not supposed to put the Continental code on 70 seat United Express flights. I see this being an issue the day they start selling tickets as a combined company (middle of 2012 if I remember correctly).

13n144e

We've already won that battle once, when they marketed several flights as "UAL" because of codeshare. Certainly doesn't mean we won't have to fight it again, but essentially what has changed? The cerificate is still CAL, callsigns don't mean jack except to ATC and Strfyr. Your absolutely right in that enforcement and monitoring will be issues. They already are. But if we are to hold the line on scope during negotiations, we better still have it intact when we get to that point. You can be sure, the company and the union will both be very aggressive on this front before the JNC ever even discusses it. Much more is at stake than the immediate ramifications. We simply cannot afford to let this one slide.