Search
Notices

New bases

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-21-2012, 07:36 PM
  #1  
New Hire
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: 737CA
Posts: 7
Default New bases

We're all so eager to hear that the company is delaying the opening of new bases, has anyone pondered what Jay and jay will be serving the company on a silver platter in exchange for them to delay. Im sure it will cost something. Why would the company now that the TPA has expired NOT move forward with the MASTER BUSINESS PLAN. careful what you wish for guys...... Just saying
Nimitz is offline  
Old 01-21-2012, 08:00 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MachJ's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 145
Default

What?
.............
MachJ is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 05:02 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: EWR B737FO
Posts: 225
Default

Originally Posted by Nimitz View Post
We're all so eager to hear that the company is delaying the opening of new bases, has anyone pondered what Jay and jay will be serving the company on a silver platter in exchange for them to delay. Im sure it will cost something. Why would the company now that the TPA has expired NOT move forward with the MASTER BUSINESS PLAN. careful what you wish for guys...... Just saying
Define delayed? What I've gotten from my LC is that both MCs are working to ease the transition of the inevitable via TDY or other methods that will help all... the timing for base fills is summer or fall, which seems late to need. Also, told that contractural rights /concessions etc...are not on the table. A bid will need to come out soon regardless..
Slammer is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 06:27 AM
  #4  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Default

Originally Posted by Nimitz View Post
We're all so eager to hear that the company is delaying the opening of new bases, has anyone pondered what Jay and jay will be serving the company on a silver platter in exchange for them to delay. Im sure it will cost something. Why would the company now that the TPA has expired NOT move forward with the MASTER BUSINESS PLAN. careful what you wish for guys...... Just saying
Length of time for SLI and threat of lawsuit for violating status quo
gettinbumped is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:05 PM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: 737 Cap
Posts: 451
Default

Originally Posted by Slammer View Post
Define delayed? What I've gotten from my LC is that both MCs are working to ease the transition of the inevitable via TDY or other methods that will help all... the timing for base fills is summer or fall, which seems late to need. Also, told that contractural rights /concessions etc...are not on the table. A bid will need to come out soon regardless..
So how exactly does the displacement process work at CAL?

At UAL, we aren't simply reassigned to a new base or seat - we're displaced and have the ability to "bump" to any seat/fleet/domicile that we can hold, so any changes like bidding IAH 320 would be accompanied with displacements from other domiciles. This can cause a significant number of training events. As a for instance, if they bump DEN 320 Captains, all of those pilots can hold a minimum of 777/400 widebody in any domicile, 756 in any domicile and obviously 320 F/O everywhere. A 320 Cap might bump to 777 F/O in SFO, which might mean a 777 F/O bump to 756 or back 320 Cap, which might mean a bump from 756 to 320 F/O.... etc... I bet if they bump 500 pilots (200 lines + reserves) collectively from Den and ORD 320, that they'll generate 1000+ bumps into other seats/fleets/bases.

This would obviously be different for the F/O's as they can likely only hold 320 F/O, but they can go where they can hold - not necessarily IAH. Eventually, if IAH doesn't get filled up with voluntary bumps, and is the junior 320 base, then the most junior will get bumped into the only base they can hold.

The entire process could easily take 4-6+ monthly bids to flush out the final outcome. That might mean literally hundreds of transition courses. Each of those takes a month, plus IOE and we don't have the staffing at TK to do that based on the level of inactivity I've seen around the place. Maybe once it is spooled back up.

This doesn't take into account the fact that adding several hundred commuters into the IAH-DEN or IAH-ORD commute will be a scheduling nightmare. I can virtually assure you that the vast majority of DEN based LUAL pilots live here and can't/won't move. Involuntarily displacing from here at least with no access to bid the replacement 737 airframes (don't know about the ORD pilot community) will be a complete train wreck to bid, train and maintain schedule integrity.

Maybe, just maybe, someone near the top realized at least some of the complexity of displacing pilots that I've just outlined and are looking for a less onerous and more workable solution. Fool hardy to hope that they've done the analysis that a common line pilot is capable of, I know, but it might make at least a little sense to find a different tact than they seemed intent on taking.
Scott Stoops is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:17 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Default

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops View Post
.....
Maybe, just maybe, someone near the top realized at least some of the complexity of displacing pilots that I've just outlined and are looking for a less onerous and more workable solution. ....
***TIC Alert***

Maybe our MC can unilaterally negotiate a deal that would ease some of those restrictions in the UAL CBA in exchange for commuting benefits that would only apply to L-UAL pilots! I see how this game is played.

***See how that works?***
AxlF16 is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:41 PM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: EWR B737FO
Posts: 225
Default

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops View Post
So how exactly does the displacement process work at CAL?

At UAL, we aren't simply reassigned to a new base or seat - we're displaced and have the ability to "bump" to any seat/fleet/domicile that we can hold, so any changes like bidding IAH 320 would be accompanied with displacements from other domiciles. This can cause a significant number of training events. As a for instance, if they bump DEN 320 Captains, all of those pilots can hold a minimum of 777/400 widebody in any domicile, 756 in any domicile and obviously 320 F/O everywhere. A 320 Cap might bump to 777 F/O in SFO, which might mean a 777 F/O bump to 756 or back 320 Cap, which might mean a bump from 756 to 320 F/O.... etc... I bet if they bump 500 pilots (200 lines + reserves) collectively from Den and ORD 320, that they'll generate 1000+ bumps into other seats/fleets/bases.

This would obviously be different for the F/O's as they can likely only hold 320 F/O, but they can go where they can hold - not necessarily IAH. Eventually, if IAH doesn't get filled up with voluntary bumps, and is the junior 320 base, then the most junior will get bumped into the only base they can hold.

The entire process could easily take 4-6+ monthly bids to flush out the final outcome. That might mean literally hundreds of transition courses. Each of those takes a month, plus IOE and we don't have the staffing at TK to do that based on the level of inactivity I've seen around the place. Maybe once it is spooled back up.

This doesn't take into account the fact that adding several hundred commuters into the IAH-DEN or IAH-ORD commute will be a scheduling nightmare. I can virtually assure you that the vast majority of DEN based LUAL pilots live here and can't/won't move. Involuntarily displacing from here at least with no access to bid the replacement 737 airframes (don't know about the ORD pilot community) will be a complete train wreck to bid, train and maintain schedule integrity.

Maybe, just maybe, someone near the top realized at least some of the complexity of displacing pilots that I've just outlined and are looking for a less onerous and more workable solution. Fool hardy to hope that they've done the analysis that a common line pilot is capable of, I know, but it might make at least a little sense to find a different tact than they seemed intent on taking.
CAL is pretty much the same. What they have historically done is delay the training for unquals to fill the priorities or caveat only current pilots initially. Agree, on both sides, as there will be 737 guys that will be involuntarily displaced from their bases...we are due a bid regardless of the domicile issue so suspect something that gives the numbers and aircraft to be out in the next few weeks
Slammer is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:41 PM
  #8  
New Hire
 
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 8
Default

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops View Post
So how exactly does the displacement process work at CAL?

At UAL, we aren't simply reassigned to a new base or seat - we're displaced and have the ability to "bump" to any seat/fleet/domicile that we can hold, so any changes like bidding IAH 320 would be accompanied with displacements from other domiciles. This can cause a significant number of training events. As a for instance, if they bump DEN 320 Captains, all of those pilots can hold a minimum of 777/400 widebody in any domicile, 756 in any domicile and obviously 320 F/O everywhere. A 320 Cap might bump to 777 F/O in SFO, which might mean a 777 F/O bump to 756 or back 320 Cap, which might mean a bump from 756 to 320 F/O.... etc... I bet if they bump 500 pilots (200 lines + reserves) collectively from Den and ORD 320, that they'll generate 1000+ bumps into other seats/fleets/bases.

This would obviously be different for the F/O's as they can likely only hold 320 F/O, but they can go where they can hold - not necessarily IAH. Eventually, if IAH doesn't get filled up with voluntary bumps, and is the junior 320 base, then the most junior will get bumped into the only base they can hold.

The entire process could easily take 4-6+ monthly bids to flush out the final outcome. That might mean literally hundreds of transition courses. Each of those takes a month, plus IOE and we don't have the staffing at TK to do that based on the level of inactivity I've seen around the place. Maybe once it is spooled back up.

This doesn't take into account the fact that adding several hundred commuters into the IAH-DEN or IAH-ORD commute will be a scheduling nightmare. I can virtually assure you that the vast majority of DEN based LUAL pilots live here and can't/won't move. Involuntarily displacing from here at least with no access to bid the replacement 737 airframes (don't know about the ORD pilot community) will be a complete train wreck to bid, train and maintain schedule integrity.

Maybe, just maybe, someone near the top realized at least some of the complexity of displacing pilots that I've just outlined and are looking for a less onerous and more workable solution. Fool hardy to hope that they've done the analysis that a common line pilot is capable of, I know, but it might make at least a little sense to find a different tact than they seemed intent on taking.
L-CAL pilots have the same displacement rights plus a company paid move if they want it.
DAVENRINO is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:43 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: EWR B737FO
Posts: 225
Default

Originally Posted by AxlF16 View Post
***TIC Alert***

Maybe our MC can unilaterally negotiate a deal that would ease some of those restrictions in the UAL CBA in exchange for commuting benefits that would only apply to L-UAL pilots! I see how this game is played.

***See how that works?***
At least you are being honest....
Slammer is offline  
Old 01-22-2012, 12:48 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: 737 Cap
Posts: 451
Default

Originally Posted by DAVENRINO View Post
L-CAL pilots have the same displacement rights plus a company paid move if they want it.
Good to hear. The company's need to reconfigure fleets/base might be just enough of a trigger to get this process jump started. They need not only a JCBA, but an ISL - and reasonably quickly IMHO, if they want to start moving the chess pieces around with minimal conflict.
Scott Stoops is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RiddleEagle18
Regional
30
12-03-2022 01:55 PM
jackace
SkyWest
66
03-21-2012 04:15 PM
jamin35008
Regional
15
06-01-2008 07:39 PM
johnson48
Fractional
20
04-15-2008 02:15 PM
So Wonwee
Fractional
21
10-05-2007 05:17 PM

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