Boarding Priority
#22
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!!!
#23
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,134
Now, trying to get this thing back on track;
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?
#24
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
No offense gettinbumped, but there's a few more things you should remember about that as well. There was A LOT more to that whole thing. It went on for quite some time that UAL pilots were processed ahead of UAX pilots on their own metal, with a fair share of UAL pilots taking full advantage of it. And it was happening on ALL UAX carriers, not jut OO. It was the worst where it's UAL gate agents, the UAX plane is out at the hardstand on a quick turn, the CA may not have time to walk to the gate, and the agent is processing the UAL pilot and not even letting the UAX pilot down to talk to the CA. YES, it happened, repeatedly, hence all the reports to the JS chairs.
For months, the respective UAX JS chairs would inform the UAL JS committee, and NOTHING was being done. The usual response was "it's a glitch in the system, the company says it's too expensive to fix, so we can't do anything about it". In other words, pi$$ off.
AGAIN, this went of for months and months. Then all but one of UAX carriers (at the time) decided to draft the letter you have been shown. Well, wasn't it a freaking coincidence that when that happened, the UAL JS committee actually put pressure on the company to fix the issue? It wasn't about starting a "jumpseat war". It was about going through proper channels and procedures for an extended period of time and constantly banging your head on an wall because the system wasn't being fixed.
There were PLENTY of threads on here about it back then, and PLENTY of UAL pilots that thought it was their god given right to have JS priority on UAX airplanes. These guys also thought that the "tail shouldn't try to wag the dog". It wasn't about that, it was about getting YOUR JS committee to get something fixed that they didn't see as a priority. UAL buys the seats in the back, but the JS is STILL the respective carrier's, and ANY mainline partner is retarded if they think they own that too. DALALPA tried it a few years back on their DelCon carriers, ehhhh, didn't work out so good for them.
So it sucks that maybe an OO pilot (or any other pilot) "threatened you". And for the record, there's been multiple times when UAX pilots have been denied the JS on mainline metal. You know, those guys that say they don't let RJ guys on their JS. Happened at BOTH the carriers I've worked at. I encourage those guys to tell the CA just what you said above;
"Dont take me to work, I don't care. But how do you think it's going to go for you when I don't make a trip because I was denied a Jumpseat on an airplane with a united paint job on it?"
Now, as far as this whole SA0X or whatever it is. Are all you guys sure that it's NOT a deadheading crew member? UAL will PS one to get them INTO position, as far as DH'ing them BACK to domicile, ehhhhh, UAL doesn't really do that for UAX crew members so much. IOW, the ONLY time it's positive space back to domicile is the LAST flight.
For months, the respective UAX JS chairs would inform the UAL JS committee, and NOTHING was being done. The usual response was "it's a glitch in the system, the company says it's too expensive to fix, so we can't do anything about it". In other words, pi$$ off.
AGAIN, this went of for months and months. Then all but one of UAX carriers (at the time) decided to draft the letter you have been shown. Well, wasn't it a freaking coincidence that when that happened, the UAL JS committee actually put pressure on the company to fix the issue? It wasn't about starting a "jumpseat war". It was about going through proper channels and procedures for an extended period of time and constantly banging your head on an wall because the system wasn't being fixed.
There were PLENTY of threads on here about it back then, and PLENTY of UAL pilots that thought it was their god given right to have JS priority on UAX airplanes. These guys also thought that the "tail shouldn't try to wag the dog". It wasn't about that, it was about getting YOUR JS committee to get something fixed that they didn't see as a priority. UAL buys the seats in the back, but the JS is STILL the respective carrier's, and ANY mainline partner is retarded if they think they own that too. DALALPA tried it a few years back on their DelCon carriers, ehhhh, didn't work out so good for them.
So it sucks that maybe an OO pilot (or any other pilot) "threatened you". And for the record, there's been multiple times when UAX pilots have been denied the JS on mainline metal. You know, those guys that say they don't let RJ guys on their JS. Happened at BOTH the carriers I've worked at. I encourage those guys to tell the CA just what you said above;
"Dont take me to work, I don't care. But how do you think it's going to go for you when I don't make a trip because I was denied a Jumpseat on an airplane with a united paint job on it?"
Now, as far as this whole SA0X or whatever it is. Are all you guys sure that it's NOT a deadheading crew member? UAL will PS one to get them INTO position, as far as DH'ing them BACK to domicile, ehhhhh, UAL doesn't really do that for UAX crew members so much. IOW, the ONLY time it's positive space back to domicile is the LAST flight.
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
#25
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
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.
#26
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
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!!!
#27
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
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.
#28
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,134
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.
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.
[b]Wait, explain this further please[b]. 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. [b]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.[b]
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.
#30
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post