Help stamp out Scope Relief Rumors.
#21
Furloughs will happen again. Sliding down into a 195 on our list beats the crap out of interviewing for a F/O position at some regional to do the same flying.
The company is welcome to bring the 737-500's back. They just should not expect me to give up protection for them to do so.
The company is welcome to bring the 737-500's back. They just should not expect me to give up protection for them to do so.
Furlough protection is HUGE.
#22
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
Furlough protection is huge, right up until it isn't.
Ever hear of a Force Mejuere clause? (Pardon the french spelling)
Personally I would rather have more real narrow bodies than SNB's. But I wouldn't trade it for scope. If they were to renegotiate the scope choke to include the number of NB or SNB's, I don't see how we would lose.
I think used buses or guppies are easier to come by right now than new 190's.
Ever hear of a Force Mejuere clause? (Pardon the french spelling)
Personally I would rather have more real narrow bodies than SNB's. But I wouldn't trade it for scope. If they were to renegotiate the scope choke to include the number of NB or SNB's, I don't see how we would lose.
I think used buses or guppies are easier to come by right now than new 190's.
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
Posts: 303
I understand your predicament However? This might be a bridge too far.
More Mainline airplanes is one thing. Another fleet is something else.
As Powerful as ALPA is you might have "gone around the bend" on this one.
I don't decry you for trying but ALPA has no business in the fleet makeup department. Especially since you can fly whatever they bring through the door. you can take this for what it's worth. They're NOT buying any new SNB so you might want to re-negotiate that scenario to more of the narrow bodies we REALLY need because the E180/195 isn't it! Especially NOT flying where the Company intends for them to GO. We've got A320's and 737-700/800's for that and possibly some returning 737-500's.
Just a matter of opinion. But you're wasting your Time.
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
************************************************** **********
I understand your predicament However? This might be a bridge too far.
More Mainline airplanes is one thing. Another fleet is something else.
As Powerful as ALPA is you might have "gone around the bend" on this one.
I don't decry you for trying but ALPA has no business in the fleet makeup department. Especially since you can fly whatever they bring through the door. you can take this for what it's worth. They're NOT buying any new SNB so you might want to re-negotiate that scenario to more of the narrow bodies we REALLY need because the E180/195 isn't it! Especially NOT flying where the Company intends for them to GO. We've got A320's and 737-700/800's for that and possibly some returning 737-500's.
Just a matter of opinion. But you're wasting your Time.
I understand your predicament However? This might be a bridge too far.
More Mainline airplanes is one thing. Another fleet is something else.
As Powerful as ALPA is you might have "gone around the bend" on this one.
I don't decry you for trying but ALPA has no business in the fleet makeup department. Especially since you can fly whatever they bring through the door. you can take this for what it's worth. They're NOT buying any new SNB so you might want to re-negotiate that scenario to more of the narrow bodies we REALLY need because the E180/195 isn't it! Especially NOT flying where the Company intends for them to GO. We've got A320's and 737-700/800's for that and possibly some returning 737-500's.
Just a matter of opinion. But you're wasting your Time.
Sled
#25
Anybody know anything for sure different, please chime in.
#26
Perhaps you didn't read my response above or Sleeve's. ALPA is not in the fleet makeup department. The company can buy/ bring back all the A319s, A320s, 737s they want. The more the merrier. No restrictions. In fact, UCH has taken delivery of 25+ 737s this year. They just won't be able to get more RJs. And that's fine.
Sled
Sled
The "ALPA won't let us have more aircraft" spewed by management is a total lie. Every major can fly as many E-145 to E-175 or CRJ-100 up to CRJ-1000's as they want... It's completely unlimited; they just can't do it (more than present # down to 450 at UAL and DAL) without pilots from the major in the cockpits.
Hold the line, take back more when we see the opportunity.
#27
************************************************** **********
I understand your predicament However? This might be a bridge too far.
More Mainline airplanes is one thing. Another fleet is something else.
As Powerful as ALPA is you might have "gone around the bend" on this one.
I don't decry you for trying but ALPA has no business in the fleet makeup department. Especially since you can fly whatever they bring through the door. you can take this for what it's worth. They're NOT buying any new SNB so you might want to re-negotiate that scenario to more of the narrow bodies we REALLY need because the E180/195 isn't it! Especially NOT flying where the Company intends for them to GO. We've got A320's and 737-700/800's for that and possibly some returning 737-500's.
Just a matter of opinion. But you're wasting your Time.
I understand your predicament However? This might be a bridge too far.
More Mainline airplanes is one thing. Another fleet is something else.
As Powerful as ALPA is you might have "gone around the bend" on this one.
I don't decry you for trying but ALPA has no business in the fleet makeup department. Especially since you can fly whatever they bring through the door. you can take this for what it's worth. They're NOT buying any new SNB so you might want to re-negotiate that scenario to more of the narrow bodies we REALLY need because the E180/195 isn't it! Especially NOT flying where the Company intends for them to GO. We've got A320's and 737-700/800's for that and possibly some returning 737-500's.
Just a matter of opinion. But you're wasting your Time.
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: 30 West
Posts: 149
We have very short memories as pilots. If you think that "It won't effect me" tell that to all the 737-200, 737-300/500, 727 Captains that lost their seat. Then they got bumped to the right seat of the 767/757 or airbus. Huge pay cut. What about all of those FO's. It resulted in the thousands of furloughs that came from giving our scope give away. It effects everyone from the top of the seniority list to the bottom.
The CS-300 pays $202.55 in Jan at 12 year pay $185.70 1st year Ca pay
The E-195 pays $159.11 at 12 year pay and $146.06 at 1st year pay
The E-190 pays $135.36 at 12 year pay and $124.26 at 1st year pay
I don't think there will be any problem filling those bids. Would you rather start at $66 an hour or $124.26.
The company has already made it public that they are looking to buy Air Canada's E-190 fleet when they turn them over to Boeing. (Part of their 737-max deal) or Republic's CS-300 firm orders. This is on top of looking for used Airbuses and 737s.
There is no need to give relief on scope for some used jets that are coming regardless of what we do. UAL needs every airplane they can get their hands on.
The CS-300 pays $202.55 in Jan at 12 year pay $185.70 1st year Ca pay
The E-195 pays $159.11 at 12 year pay and $146.06 at 1st year pay
The E-190 pays $135.36 at 12 year pay and $124.26 at 1st year pay
I don't think there will be any problem filling those bids. Would you rather start at $66 an hour or $124.26.
The company has already made it public that they are looking to buy Air Canada's E-190 fleet when they turn them over to Boeing. (Part of their 737-max deal) or Republic's CS-300 firm orders. This is on top of looking for used Airbuses and 737s.
There is no need to give relief on scope for some used jets that are coming regardless of what we do. UAL needs every airplane they can get their hands on.
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,133
There was no reason to negotiate high rates for an aircraft not on property. We did, however, have to get some pay rate to show the company we would/will fly small 100 seat aircraft at UAL.
The pot of money is the same so no reason to pull down current aircraft rates to fund the 190s that aren't here. Once the aircraft arrives we can get higher rates on the following contract. It will suck, and be junior for a couple years, but we will fix it and at least WE are flying the airplane.
I don't think any CA should be paid less than any FO, but I have nothing against paying only $2/hr more than a WB FO.
The pot of money is the same so no reason to pull down current aircraft rates to fund the 190s that aren't here. Once the aircraft arrives we can get higher rates on the following contract. It will suck, and be junior for a couple years, but we will fix it and at least WE are flying the airplane.
I don't think any CA should be paid less than any FO, but I have nothing against paying only $2/hr more than a WB FO.
I don't know the deal at USAirways and I don't care; there are enough of us here that would be happy to fly the bottom 3 aircraft on the payscale because we know it's furlough protection. And when one looks at the benefits side of a mainline job vs a stupid jet4jobs program, the current payscales look great.
JBLU doesn't have a problem filling their 175s and while some here may move off of the small equipment quickly, others will be happy to fly it.
Unfortunately, if the company offered an extra 50 cents an hour on all other pay rates, the flying would probably be given away to the regionals.
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,133
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post