Originally Posted by ewrbasedpilot (Post 1133245)

Just made aware on the MAR captains staffing in IAH on the B737 that a couple of the UAL furloughed pilots are holding CAPTAIN POSITIONS? I had to wait 10 years to make captain at the first chance I could hold it and now UAL FURLOUGHED pilots are waltzing right into Captains seats? How is this possible? What is going on here? Don't mean to be inflammatory, but I know a LOT of FO's who'd like to be captains but aren't senior enough to hold it, yet we're bringing back pilots from "another" airline and putting them in the left seat? Something isn't adding up here. Enquiring minds want to know.:confused: Is this some sort of "side deal" made to appease the UAL pilots?

Originally Posted by ewrbasedpilot (Post 1133245)

Just made aware on the MAR captains staffing in IAH on the B737 that a couple of the UAL furloughed pilots are holding CAPTAIN POSITIONS? I had to wait 10 years to make captain at the first chance I could hold it and now UAL FURLOUGHED pilots are waltzing right into Captains seats? How is this possible? What is going on here? Don't mean to be inflammatory, but I know a LOT of FO's who'd like to be captains but aren't senior enough to hold it, yet we're bringing back pilots from "another" airline and putting them in the left seat? Something isn't adding up here. Enquiring minds want to know.:confused: Is this some sort of "side deal" made to appease the UAL pilots?

Originally Posted by JMD16 (Post 1133270)

Grenade throwing joke above. Have a name to go with that. Everyone from the first couple of classes is on reserve unless they are in Guam where it is a mix of reserve and bottom line holder....as FO's.
No one is appeasing us that I've seen.

Originally Posted by ewrbasedpilot

Is this some sort of "side deal" made to appease the UAL pilots?

Originally Posted by Blockoutblockin (Post 1133275)

I don't think he is joking. If you go to the CCS staffing page for IAH 737 Ca it shows two new hires at the bottom of the list. Mistake maybe but they are there. Could they be instant management types, I don't know. But the names are there so no joke.

Originally Posted by SoCalGuy (Post 1133295)

Relax....

CCS has had some "glitches" this past week since the "Staffing Drop Down" was published for MAR. The general CCS/IT department has had their hands full this week. This was compound even further when the PBS Filtering/Sorting "SNAFU" occured on Thursday, as evidence of the MEC Blastmail that was sent out Thursday afternoon.

Looking at the CCS Staffing Drop, I see 3 Pilots that I know who are "shown" to be in different seats/bases for MAR than where they 'currently reside'. I have talked to two of them, and they have confirmed it's bogus intel. Their PBS screens/bid status are showing 'correct' for their MAR PBS bids.

In view of that, I would bet the house that the 2 CA's with "N" numbers residing at the bottom of the MAR Staffing Drop for IAH are bogus as well.

Conspiracy adverted.

Originally Posted by SoCalGuy (Post 1133295)

Relax....

CCS has had some "glitches" this past week since the "Staffing Drop Down" was published for MAR. The general CCS/IT department has had their hands full this week. This was compound even further when the PBS Filtering/Sorting "SNAFU" occured on Thursday, as evidence of the MEC Blastmail that was sent out Thursday afternoon.

Looking at the CCS Staffing Drop, I see 3 Pilots that I know who are "shown" to be in different seats/bases for MAR than where they 'currently reside'. I have talked to two of them, and they have confirmed it's bogus intel. Their PBS screens/bid status are showing 'correct' for their MAR PBS bids.

In view of that, I would bet the house that the 2 CA's with "N" numbers residing at the bottom of the MAR Staffing Drop for IAH are bogus as well.

Conspiracy adverted.

Originally Posted by Blockoutblockin (Post 1133296)

Your comment for me to relax is inappropriate. I merely replied that the original poster was probably not joking as the staffing page indicates what he stated. I also offered that perhaps it was a mistake or that they have been made management pilots. I never suggested there was a conspiracy. As an aside, do you even know what constitutes a conspiracy? And lastly, you are certainly entitled to your opinion as to why the names are there but your opinion does not relate to what I posted. Perhaps you meant to quote the original poster.