United Shopping for 200 New Boeings
04-25-2012, 12:37 PM
#51
Keep Calm Chive ON
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Originally Posted by Once United
Not a bit of a tidbit does it buy - currently being held hostage to the collective bargaining process. You see they know where they've been and know what's being done to them collectively today by CAL/UAL MEC's by not getting a JCBA. Don't try keeping them in the past because you can't offer any hope/direction for the future.
I DO know the seeds sewed in the past draws the base from which you reap in the future.....but I'm sure you know that.
04-25-2012, 01:42 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
Who said anything about "keeping them in the past"??? Don't know what you're reading....
I DO know the seeds sewed in the past draws the base from which you reap in the future.....but I'm sure you know that.
I DO know the seeds sewed in the past draws the base from which you reap in the future.....but I'm sure you know that.
Yes and I think you know the intent of the comment. Playing these guys for some small giggle or political gain is wrong. If you can't offer a solution going forward, don't keep the wound open by turning the knife. They deserve more respect than that.
04-25-2012, 04:56 PM
#53
Keep Calm Chive ON
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Originally Posted by Once United
Yes and I think you know the intent of the comment. Playing these guys for some small giggle or political gain is wrong. If you can't offer a solution going forward, don't keep the wound open by turning the knife. They deserve more respect than that.
Please.....NO WHERE have I said/played either side's furloughs for "giggles". To insist that we NOT bring it up because it "turns a knife"??? That resides in the area-code ludicrous.
If you're willing to bury your head in the sand, and choose not revisit the dark facts of what 'outsourcing' has done to our jobs.....HAVE AT IT. I on the other hand, will be damn sure it stands ripe in everyone's voting memory when it comes to solidifying any future (J)CBA. I don't know about you, but I sure as heck don't have the stomach to watch this 'train-wreck' of a mistake come around again on any future CBA......EVER.
Solution?
04-25-2012, 05:21 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
Stop putting on your 'best' thespian face, it's not becoming.
Please.....NO WHERE have I said/played either side's furloughs for "giggles". To insist that we NOT bring it up because it "turns a knife"??? That resides in the area-code ludicrous.
If you're willing to bury your head in the sand, and choose not revisit the dark facts of what 'outsourcing' has done to our jobs.....HAVE AT IT. I on the other hand, will be damn sure it stands ripe in everyone's voting memory when it comes to solidifying any future (J)CBA. I don't know about you, but I sure as heck don't have the stomach to watch this 'train-wreck' of a mistake come around again on any future CBA......EVER.
Solution?
Please.....NO WHERE have I said/played either side's furloughs for "giggles". To insist that we NOT bring it up because it "turns a knife"??? That resides in the area-code ludicrous.
If you're willing to bury your head in the sand, and choose not revisit the dark facts of what 'outsourcing' has done to our jobs.....HAVE AT IT. I on the other hand, will be damn sure it stands ripe in everyone's voting memory when it comes to solidifying any future (J)CBA. I don't know about you, but I sure as heck don't have the stomach to watch this 'train-wreck' of a mistake come around again on any future CBA......EVER.
Solution?
I don't think you and yours are so concerned with the scope/ RJ issue, but instead are looking for a way to overcome the political shortfall after we get a JCBA and SLI. I'm sure you're not lost on the fact that JP will be gone unless you guys can get a majority at some of the UAL bases with the equipment and people moves. Every time you and yours bring this up you're doing so in hopes of winning a LEC vote for a CAL guy. The furloughed guys are smarter than that and know where you and yours are coming from. If you were this concerned about outsourcing of jobs from RJ's and foreign carriers you should wrap yourself is some of the efforts and issues being brought forward by the UAL MEC.
04-25-2012, 08:55 PM
#55
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
Oldmako isn't being touchy. He is employing a rational thought process of an experienced pilot. He doesn't buy into the shiny new jet syndrome. He simply prefers a used BMW to a shiny new Civic.
Touchy would be appropriate when someone lacking in manners walked into your house and said, "what a dump", or addressed your significant other as a 'deuce and a half."
p.s. That was a generic scenario. My apologies if it touches close to reality.
Touchy would be appropriate when someone lacking in manners walked into your house and said, "what a dump", or addressed your significant other as a 'deuce and a half."
p.s. That was a generic scenario. My apologies if it touches close to reality.
Point taken. Now look in the mirror. I find it amazing that the quips and jabs that flow so easily on this board are from LCAL pilots only.
The only knife turning here is continuing to forget the fact that 1400+ pilots have one in their back and the LCAL pilots aren't the ones that did it. Last I looked a large number of them are flying at LCAL. Don't say our MEC isn't trying to do something to end this.
04-25-2012, 10:07 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by EWR73FO
Point taken. Now look in the mirror. I find it amazing that the quips and jabs that flow so easily on this board are from LCAL pilots only.
The only knife turning here is continuing to forget the fact that 1400+ pilots have one in their back and the LCAL pilots aren't the ones that did it. Last I looked a large number of them are flying at LCAL. Don't say our MEC isn't trying to do something to end this.
The only knife turning here is continuing to forget the fact that 1400+ pilots have one in their back and the LCAL pilots aren't the ones that did it. Last I looked a large number of them are flying at LCAL. Don't say our MEC isn't trying to do something to end this.
You would have thought that those expensive 737's would have been ditched while in the throws of Chp11. Why was it only after the initial dance with CAL in 2008 that UA mgmt decided that the 737 had to go? Because the deal was near and it was time to clear the path. No matter what fudged numbers mgmt gives to the profitability of the express operation, those RJ CASM's are higher than the -300's and -500's. I think no one needs convincing on that point.
I know you feel magnanimous at the fact that UA pilots are at your airline but what was really the choice? Hire off the street? I think all your sides, mgmt included, felt hiring off the street in lieu of pulling in UA furloughees would not only be immoral but create an overly complicated and untenable situation that would be bound for the courts.
04-26-2012, 05:30 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: EWR B737FO
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by boxer6
Yes, UAL has 1400+ on furlough. Keep in mind that DAL has scope clauses as, or more, liberal than UA. They didn't park 100 jets. Why? The major impetus is UAL mgmt/BOD had decided more than 10 years ago that a merger would be their goal and their size, larger than UAL/CAL combined now, would be prohibitive to pass DOJ/DOT anti trust hurdles.
You would have thought that those expensive 737's would have been ditched while in the throws of Chp11. Why was it only after the initial dance with CAL in 2008 that UA mgmt decided that the 737 had to go? Because the deal was near and it was time to clear the path. No matter what fudged numbers mgmt gives to the profitability of the express operation, those RJ CASM's are higher than the -300's and -500's. I think no one needs convincing on that point.
I know you feel magnanimous at the fact that UA pilots are at your airline but what was really the choice? Hire off the street? I think all your sides, mgmt included, felt hiring off the street in lieu of pulling in UA furloughees would not only be immoral but create an overly complicated and untenable situation that would be bound for the courts.
You would have thought that those expensive 737's would have been ditched while in the throws of Chp11. Why was it only after the initial dance with CAL in 2008 that UA mgmt decided that the 737 had to go? Because the deal was near and it was time to clear the path. No matter what fudged numbers mgmt gives to the profitability of the express operation, those RJ CASM's are higher than the -300's and -500's. I think no one needs convincing on that point.
I know you feel magnanimous at the fact that UA pilots are at your airline but what was really the choice? Hire off the street? I think all your sides, mgmt included, felt hiring off the street in lieu of pulling in UA furloughees would not only be immoral but create an overly complicated and untenable situation that would be bound for the courts.
It's called $150.00 a barrel fuel and UA had no hedge or new fuel efficient aircraft to offset, and lots of debt, drying up credit and a SCOPE clause, that gave the company the perfect storm. You were just removed from BK a few yrs prior and had not reinvested in your airline in a decade. I think you lost billions in the first half of 2008 . Thats not a slam against you guys, just about how poorly your mgt team ran UA for years with no vision for your growth. The only vision they had was for padding their accounts, and they certainly did..at your and other UA exoense. That said, CAL parked all our 300s and most the 500s, and furloughed. Would have parked more, had it not been for lease cost on the 500 s and our SCOPE clause and new aircraft.
Wrt hiring UA furloughs, morality of mgt had absolutely NOTHING to do with it...It was the CAL and UA MECs going to the company and pushing for job offers to UA furloughs. Of course it was the right thing to do...
04-26-2012, 07:19 AM
#58
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
Originally Posted by boxer6
.........I know you feel magnanimous at the fact that UA pilots are at your airline but what was really the choice? Hire off the street? I think all your sides, mgmt included, felt hiring off the street in lieu of pulling in UA furloughees would not only be immoral but create an overly complicated and untenable situation that would be bound for the courts.
Magnanimous? No. Grateful? Yes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
newKnow
Mergers and Acquisitions
4
04-28-2008 07:08 PM
