Have no idea what you are talking about.

This thread is about the "SA0X" boarding priority being erroneously applied to UAX personnel on mainline UAL flights. It has nothing to do with anyone's jumpseat. It has everything to do with United Airlines employees and their families being left behind at the gate. There is no "jumpseat war" going on here. Until this gets fixed, IF YOU ARE A UAX EMPLOYEE TRAVELING ON YOUR OWN METAL AND SUBSEQUENTIALLY RETURNING ON A UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT, YOU SHOULD LIST ONE WAY, EACH WAY! Otherwise you will likely be boarding the United Airlines flight on a bogus priority. There's the temporary fix guys. Now just show some INTEGRITY!!!

Understand and agree with your point. But it's probably along the lines of Pro-stans. Like the jumpseat, pro-stans is something that a majority of the time stays at the pilot level. Combined with the fact that JS committee members commute themselves so they have a vested interest in getting matter resolved ASAP. As opposed to trying to deal with a rep on a contract issue or negotiating item, and other things come into play such as senior vs. junior, line holder vs. reserve, etc etc etc and the rep simply doesn't care about a specific concern.

Now, trying to get this thing back on track;

I'll ask the question again, since you overlooked/ignored it. Are you absolutely sure the SA0X UAX person is NOT on a deadhead? Because, again, not all UAX deadheads are positive space, you're simply at the top of the non-rev list. It's ONLY if it's getting into position that it becomes a positive space, OR the last flight back to domicile that's positive space. Otherwise, again, it's just top priority SA travel. Now, if UAL wants to treat the UAX carrier's crew members that way, that's cool. UAL buys the seats after all. Sucks for the guys that live in base, or you are supposed to DH back and catch a commute home, ect. But it gets better. If the DH involves getting back to domicile, and it's a reserve pilot and more flying was tacked on their schedule, well, that just means that pilot may miss they're flight. Which means a flight, or whole string of flights may cancel. Which means that UAL passengers that bought tickets from UAL to ride on airplanes that UAL management decided to outsource to for the lowest price just got seriously inconvenienced. Isn't that just awesome!!!!! I've witnessed it happen more times than I can count.

You mean like the integrity that gets exercised when a pilot (regardless of carrier) gets denied a JS because a CA who's nothing more than an overgrown child suffering from small manhood syndrome thinks he's "really gonna show these guys and stick it to em by denying them a ride", all while trying to masquerade around as a "professional pilot". Seriously, have you ever seen the email comm that takes place between JS committee members? It can be pretty comical to hear the how and why a CA denied a pilot.

I guess we could also talk about the integrity (lack thereof) that a very small minority of mainline pilots exercised by taking full advantage of improper JS priority. BTW, that problem went on for well over a year. Let's hope this boarding issue thing (if it is a SA issue and NOT a deadhead issue) gets resolved to for UAL mainline employees in less time than the JS fiasco did.

Now just imagine, if scope wasn't given away on the ESOP midterm vote or on contract 2000, all these little boarding priority, jumpseat, and other silly peeing contests WOULDN'T be happening, would they?

Yes I'm sure. SA is not a Positive Space code. It was a 2011 hire United Express employees and kid who got the first two standby seats on the airplane. I was delayed in arrival so I didn't have a chance to rectify it before they were already on board. All the UAL employees got on anyway, so it was a moot point THIS TIME.

You didn't need to type all that. I know exactly what happened. And I know exactly what is happening now. We are over a month into this problem, and United has ZERO intention of fixing it anytime soon even though its just a "quick change to the program". Same as your little Jumpseat fit. But somehow, you wanted THAT problem resolved IMMEDIATELY by our JS committee (who has NO control over the situation), but now its no big deal. I don't expect a resolution for several months. Why? For the same reason I told you guys that it would take awhile for the Jumpseat problem to be fixed. Because United Airlines, you know, the ones who actually control the system, DON'T CARE ABOUT THE EMPLOYEES. I also remember that at the time of that little Jumpseat snafu we were reeling from the fallout of a Ch 11 filing, a 50% pay cut, parking an additional 100 airplanes, furloughing thousands of pilots, and getting our work rules gutted. In other words, we were a little busy. Personally, I think UAL should have priority on UAX jumpseats anyway as we paid for the airplane. My company doesn't care enough about us to set it up that way, so the system is as it is, and I accept that. For your at-risk flying, I firmly agree all UAX pilots and employees should go behind UAL employees. As my spouse is a UAX employee, I have the "privilege" of seeing what is being said on some of the UAX employee boards. The sense of entitlement is astonishing for a company with someone else's paint job on the side of the plane, someone else's name in their announcements, sells no tickets, and doesn't pay for their own fuel. Just my .02c

Wait, explain this further please. In this particular case, it was a UAX employee traveling with their kid, and it wasn't flight crew, so it was definitely not a deadhead. What kind of DH are you talking about? The only DH we have is traveling to cover an assignment, or returning from that assignment. We can deviate from a DH on another flight, but that too is positive space, just at a different priority. There is no such thing as a "space available DH". How is it that your company can just put you at the top of a UAL standby list but not make it positive space? That is something else I need to make sure we grieve.

In fairness to the xjet poster, I'm the one who brought the jumpseat up. I was simply trying to remind the UAX pilots how stupid it was that they threatened a jumpseat action against UAL pilots over a computer glitch.

The same way that I knew that I was getting aced by a 2011 hire Express employee. I looked at the codes when I listed and asked.

I fully agree that this is a UNICAL problem, and not the responsibility of Express employees. Perhaps we should remind the UAX pilots the same next time there is a glitch in the system that goofs up their jumpseat priority.

Here's the rub. I'm PRAYING that I don't make it to work soon because I get left behind while a bunch of United Express employees waltz on to our jets. It would be SOOO sweet to call the Chief Pilot and explain why I didn't make my trip, followed by a grievance to make sure I was paid for it due to it being a UAL induced failure. HOWEVER, when I don't make it home to my family on one of my 9-10 nights at home a month for the same reason, my sense of humor dims considerably.

I know, I was simply interjecting the facts of what went down, as they are OFTEN left out.

Just to clarify. I WASN'T flying UAX at that time, so it's not my "little jumpseat fit". Just as the JetBlue pilots that were having problems in JFK years ago wasn't my "little fit" either. But it sure was a reflection of how some legacy pilots tend to behave.

Sigh.......As stated, the problem went on for well over a year, closer to 2. The UAX JS chairs were going through proper channels and were running into a brick wall EVERY SINGLE TIME. So as far as "immediately" goes, it's all relative.

Yep, sucks. And just like I told you last week before and after you went to the dentist. I've been there, I've done that. A bunch of children exercising their own little agendas on other pilots gets them NOWHERE! So the fact that management just got done handing you guys you aresholes via BK concession is NO excuse to treat other pilots badly, is it?

Have to agree to disagree on this one. Your company DIDN'T pay for the airplane. They're leased. In the case of the ERJ's, they are leased by UNICAL, then subleased to ExpressJet. Now, if UNICAL wanted to buy the airplanes, bring ALL the RJ flying back in house, then I could see a priority. But UAL DIDN'T buy the airplane, they ONLY bought the revenue seats in the back, NOT the jumpseat

As stated, when a UAX crewmember needs to get to an outstation or other hub other than they're domicile, UAX positive spaces them. Or rather, the UAX carrier buys the seat on mainline to get them there. And it costs the UAX carrier a decent chunk of change to do so. However, when it's to return them to domicile, that DH is NOT positive space unless it's the last flight of the day. IOW, a crew member that is supposed to be DH'd back to domicile ISN'T positive space, yet is on a deadhead. But that deadhead priority is ONLY on a SA basis, unless the last flight of the day. Does that make sense? What are you going to grieve, that a crewmember that is supposed to be on a positive space/deadhead isn't really on a positive space and that they're OLNY on the top of the non-rev pile? Again, it's a deadhead, the crew member is working and on a duty period, yet isn't positive space. But back to my point, sure. Put all deadheading UAX crewmembers behind ALL non revenue ALL the time. Let a bunch UAX flights cancel, let a buch of UAL passengers that bought tickets from UAL be inconvenienced and cost even MORE money that gets to come out of BOTH our paychecks.

And I agree with your point. Seriously, if I don't get to work because of a lack of boarding priority or some little CA's personal agenda of denying express pilots the jumpseat, I'm a honeybadger. I don't care. I call my CP and tell them what happened and that's that. When it comes to getting home, lack of boarding priority doesn't concern me. Because AGAIN, just like I told you last week, the regional ISN'T my career destination.

Read on another forum that a new software upload tonight will fix this.

Put your assault rifles away !!

Thank goodness!....See there, the squeaky wheel does get greased on occasion!