And so it begins
 

CHICAGO, April 29, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- United Airlines today announced an agreement to add 30 Embraer 175 regional jets to the United Express fleet. Under an agreement with Embraer, United will purchase the aircraft with deliveries in 2014 and 2015. These aircraft will be operated by a United Express partner to be announced later.

Oh goody. We have 'em right where we want 'em for the scope choke.

:rolleyes:

Why are WE buying these airplanes???

Let Skywest pay for them.

I can't wait until 2017 when we give them unlimited 90 seaters (with a limited number of 110 seaters). Yeah....then we'll have won.:mad:

Raise your glasses again to Grand Admiral Lee Moak. :rolleyes:

First time outsourcing larger than 50 seat jets for LCAL in a long time (ever?). Last time LCAL ran with new RJs mainline hiring ceased for years while Expressjet's list exploded. The bottom 10% at UAL after SLI may be there a very long time.

So that makes it that all the majors have orders for large RJs.

Super. ALPA (and APA/USAPA) sure are doing a GREAT JOB. Idiots.

Unless its a 1:1 exchange on a 50 seat plane I would very well be willing to bet the regional getting these will find it difficult to staff....... Somethings going to have to give.....

You know the pilot shortage is for realz when more flying is doled out to a regional.

fyi


United Airlines orders 30 regional jets from Brazil's Embraer: Thomson Reuters Business News - MSN Money

Blame Moak, blame ALPA, but of course don't blame 67% of your brethren that voted it in!!! Main reason why most CAL pilots voted NO...

Time to park another 737 fleet.

All I blame is the yes voters. This is why some are scared of the SLI an where it places them. I say time to eat your veggies.

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

Because we've (UAL & CAL) always "bought" the RJs one way or the other. Either we bought the aircraft outright and leased it back to the regional, or we leased the aircraft ourselves and then sub-leased it, or we "co-signed" the lease agreements.

The regionals don't have the capital to buy RJs without a deal from the mothership. Nobody in the in their right mind will loan $$$ to a regional without a mainline deal in place.

DING!!!
Exactly correct.

Exactly. Blame everyone but those who had the vote! ALPA is not the problem, the "yes" voters are.

I heard that 85% of CAL guys voted "yes" and the UAL guys majority "no" votes couldn't overcome it.

Has ALPA ever released the percentages from the two respective sides?

Ala Air Wisconsin back in the day?

Nope ......and they never will. Although I would LOVE to see it - no good would be gotten from it.

Let the 757 wide body pilots blame whoever they want if it makes them feel better.

Not true at all. I believe you are mistaken or trying to start something. Breakdown did not go like that at all. I can post all kinda "I heard" but it would be irresponsible for me to do that based on everything that is going on at the company and union and truth needs to be the only thing put out for review and discussion. I should mention that I am just irritated that anything above 50 is coming but do realize that this may not be all bad. If done right it could reduce actual overall RJ positions here at United and that would be good. However, the economics will tempt mgmt to really figure out how to make it work.

Whatever the stats are. That's why I voted NO. It WILL make me sick seeing an "Express" name on an aircraft that large.
It's over now and I press on.

So how do you know that most voted no at cal?

Contractually, this has already been determined to be a 76 seat airplane (rated 85,000 lbs but 88 seats max capacity) that triggers scope choke. It's good news not bad. It is an indication that the ALPA plan is working and they are planning on replacing 50 seaters with 76 seaters to the extent allowed. If you don't believe me call your ALPA rep who worked on this topic.


http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps85205cdb.jpg

I'm just surprised it took so long to order. Its been 5months. I figured they would have wanted them in place by jan 1. Now comes the rfp for express.. who's gonna get the axe for the removed 50 seat hulls the release talks about

Now that is funny! :D

XJT has ERJ's that were scheduled to leave.

*Sigh* I shouldn't bother BUT just can't help myself. Simple fact, management was going to park 50 seaters. They are high cost, unpopular with elites, and running out of airframe time. Another simple fact, management desperately wanted the CRJ 900 sized airframe since they are lower cost, popular with elites, and brand new. End result, management is getting the airframes they want that have an entire generation of shelf life to utilize.

Yet ALPA says we won the scope war because we forced management to park 50 seaters!?! GMAFB! Unfortunately the koolaid will wear off one day when we all collectively realize we are a bunch of idiots for buying off on yet another supposed 'scope choke'...

Your post says nothing about how you would evaluate success. The advent of 76 seat orders heralds a reduction in fleet size and ASMs. What is it that you are seeing as negative and how do you propose to measure success or failure? If UAL has 1 billion available seat miles and 40% are express and that falls to 1 billion available seat miles with 10% express is that failure?

You are espousing a line of thinking that is totally without merit and shows a complete lack of understanding of the latest scope clause.

How do you know this? Can you give me proof in any shape or form?

So in total I asked 4 questions. I hope you will spare me glib answers and give me a response that has factual content and cogent data similar to the contractual language and seat diagram which I posted above.

Sunvox they don't get it. They aren't used to seeing anything larger than a 50 seat jet because when all you have are 737s you really don't need to feed them with anything bigger. So now they are in the "big boy league" and they see a bigger airplane feeding a global widebody airline, and they get all excited.

Of course they don't mention that their old contract allowed unlimited Q400 airplanes which can be configured up to 80 seats. At least we got that one removed....

This order being discussed is not a CRJ 900. A CRJ 900 would have to be flown by mainline.

The fact is you can't buy a 50 seat or a 70 seat aircraft anymore, and our "scope choke" is predicated on 76 seat aircraft for feed and 90 seat aircraft for flying at the mainline. Express flying will fall in the coming decade, if it doesn't I will buy all the beer for anyone I fly with from 2023 on :) and I won't retire until 2031.

Contractually, this has already been determined to be a 76 seat airplane (rated 85,000 lbs but 88 seats max capacity) that triggers scope choke. It's good news not bad. It is an indication that the ALPA plan is working and they are planning on replacing 50 seaters with 76 seaters to the extent allowed. If you don't believe me call your ALPA rep who worked on this topic.








http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps85205cdb.jpg

LAX-
As a LCAL Pilot, I would gladly go back to my old Scope.
The reality is.. the 50 seaters are a dying breed.
What the company wants (and got) and what passengers want is/are and Jet Aircraft with a First/Business class that is comfortable and profitable on long (2-3 hour flights) segments.

The reality is, the Q400 is a good airplane, but it is not going to fill the mission that these E175's are going to.

At the end of the day, our (CAL) old Scope was a disadvantage to the company when compared to what the competition is/was doing.
I believe that is called "Leverage".

It is what it is. But I just feel that the money that UAL/UCH just spent (reported as a value of 2.9 BILLION [though we know it is probably much much less]) for these aircraft to be operated by non UAL Employees (Pilots, F/A's, Mechanics...) could and should have been spent towards giving us Full Retro, Delta + something TODAY and a host of other things~

We'll get them in 2020.

Motch

PS> Someone remember this Thread in about 3-4 years when we are furloughing, parking the A319's and growing the Large RJ Fleet.

PPS> Just my opinion...

And when your scope is a 50-seat jet you actually have 737s to fly. 737s may be "small" but they're employing a lot of pilots--at the mainline. Yes, we are getting excited, but not in an optimistic way. If this is big boy league, then it's too bad we've finally made it. BTW 2010 LCAL international block hours 562k; LUAL 431k.

Go back to some of the financial reports. XJT ERJ's were scheduled to be parked BEFORE the JCBA even was drafted.

"The E175s will be operated under the United Express brand. The aircraft will be configured in a 76-seat layout. The first delivery is scheduled for the first quarter of 2014."

We will know in a year from today how many 50 seaters are parked for the arrival of these new aircraft. Hopefully someone can reference this Thread then!

I no longer reach out to my FO Rep after she told me, on the phone.. "Do not believe the $400 million Retro rumor, or the PayScale leaks."
That was at the beginning of Nov 12 before the MEC had their TA Vote.

Guess we'll get them in 2020.

Motch

United says it will fly the new planes under its United Express brand, and will configure them as 46-seaters to offer a large first-class section, and larger overhead storage bins. The planes will replace older 50-seat aircraft -- yet may help make up for carrying fewer customers by being more fuel efficient.

Just got this from a Mötley Fool article.

No it doesn't. If its under 86,000 MGTOW lbs slap that Express title on it. Hint hint check Delta. And you claim I lack understanding of our scope clause?

As I said Joe I probably shouldn't of bothered objecting when you said 'scope choke is working'. If you want to believe our scope is working against management go right ahead. The simple truth is this issue goes far beyond ASM's and fleet counts.

It's hard to believe after three decades of consistently losing our collective arses this generation of airline pilots surrendered yet another hull size to the regionals. Management has optimized scope to meet the challenges the market brought, not ALPA. There will be consequences for all of us including pompous widebody pilots with 18 years longevity.