Well good for you (really). It's been 8 months since the SLI, we've got decades to write this story. Don't worry, nobody is going to bump you out of your Cappy seat. There is plenty for all. We'll just come in on top, by displacement or vacancy, the way I said we would. Ta. Ta.

Sledy

Now you have ruined my day thinking we had a shot at future BFF. If my psychic doesn't come thru with a viable third and final guess, my last resort is to engage slick ties, placate them with free beer, and listen to their concerns as we build a unity bridge.

Back to the topic.... I asked about this. If the delay is pilot induced, then they are not SUPPOSED to get a bump. It has to be UAL induced. Now it wouldn't surprise me if United is so screwed up that they can't even figure out if a pilot calls in sick or fatigued to delay training.

But I can't imagine too many guys are purposely bidding 737 FO slots in an attempt to hold 756 Captain. But even if they are, you have to realize that if they ARE able to slide into that seat, it's because. LCAL guy was already there. And why was he/she already there? Because the bids during our 3 years of merger pre-SLI were CRAZY out of whack and lopsided. So let's call a spade a spade and realize that this is a prime example of a "windfall". And it continues to this day with some dude on here bragging about his straight 200% lines and making so much money that he doesn't have to work (classy). You think the LUAL fleets are seeing this "opportunity"???? If you would like to compare merger windfalls, I think you should be honest and realize that the list is EVERY so slightly lopsided. Sarcasm intended. Enjoy your profit sharing you obtained illegally.

Wow, I go to sleep last night and see what I miss?

Bottom line is we, the royal we, paid for everything in OUR contract. There is a lot of stuff in there to make sure the company schedules and operate us efficiently, economic incentives. If the company buys sim time and forgets about it, not surprising? Our little issues will hardly be a drop in the bucket at the end of the fiscal year. Time out on training, leads to bumps, fine, it's in the contract--bought and paid for. As has already been stated, a couple of fatigue or sick calls are not that unusual and really shouldn't impact the 90 day clock that much. If the time is exceeded, then, the company pays for the economic incentive in our contract, plain and simple.

This training issue will effect the bottom line and our future viability, but not in and of itself. The larger issue is the horrendous decisions made by OUR management. How long, and if, they stay in power will have much more to do with our future than a few guys getting bumps out of an equipment award.

Carry on.

The lcal scope sme stood up in front of a mostly CAL crowd at the Dec 1 roadshow and told everyone to get over the size of the jets, because the old CAL scope clause had holes in it, and that although there are limited 76 seaters being flown the overall scope language and limitations to the company was stronger than the previous one. Yes its easy to just look at the size of the jet, but how can you do that and then ignore a code share partner that is flying your passengers that flies 747s and 777s and be ok with that but then worry about a code share partner with 76 seat jets between EWR and Scranton PA?

We are truly screwed as long as we have 50%+1 made out your type. Thought the glaring gutting of mainline jobs in the Noughties might turn the tide, but obviously not. And no one ever said scope the RJ's, but allow international code share at will. Btw let me know when 76 seaters are flying from EWR-AVP. They will be doing all former mainline flying according to what has been released so far.

Mesa Airlines to début United EMB-175 operations in June - ch-aviation.com

United had a similar scope clause in the 90s and we had over 12,000 pilots in 2001, so this isn't a straight line comparison. It was 9/11 and not SCOPE that caused the furloughs. Also, DAL has a worse scope than we do and they have 12,000 pilots as well.

Not only that but the full force of the scope provision isn't in place until Jan 2016 when it is at its most restrictive, so I'm not convinced that this is costing jobs, especially when we have hired 400 pilots off the street and recalled a total of 1,700 furlougees from CAL and UAL. far exceeding the number of retirements in the last 4 years. That's 2,100 more pilots than were actively flying for CAL or UAL in 2010.

We were told by the naysayers that if we voted in this scope we would furlough 1,500 - 2,000 pilots, and the reality is that the opposite has happened.

Hiring is the only true barometer of whether the scope clause is working the way we wanted it to, and apparently they can't hire as fast as they want because of training problems in IAH.

Word.

That was posted only after some LUAL guy posted wishing bad Karma onto us first (that's classy). Not bragging we have zero control over what routes are flown by what plane. Don't be a hater.

Tit for tat, eh? Ok, I'll bite. The post was started by a LCAL guy who was upset over what he (wrongly) assumed was some LUAL guys scamming the system to get a good deal (that's rich).

Not hating. We don't have guys on furlough so if you want to 200% feel free. You're delaying everyone's upward movement by allowing the company to fly with less pilots, but it's in the contract so I don't have any beef with it. I just think it's ironic that on a thread charging that LUAL pilots are working the system you jump in to brag about how you work the system. Are you one of those guys that shows off his $42k a month paycheck to his F/O's. Heard about that one on the Jumpseat the other day.

We are only hiring due to retirements, UAL work rules applied to Fred's PE operation and most importantly FAR 117. Growth, NOPE. What you call restrictive in the scope clause will only be seen in the parking of 50 seaters which management has no problem doing as long as the 76 seaters grow, which sure as hades they are. Scope as of right now is not hurting, but the stage has been set for more future small narrowbody outsourcing just as it was by Contract 2000. And I have zero doubt you will vote YES once again to save your own bacon.

Btw if the were hiring as fast as you believe, we would have classes full of New Hires and not half recalls.