It is about rebalancing the bases and not a flush. The company wants to move pilots to where the flying is moving. This is out of the control of the pilots but the Houston LEC projects that the flying MAY return. Ben's answer is to give IAH displaced pilots "super seniority" to cover all 737 Captain vacancies no matter how they occur. This would cover retirements, vacancies created by equipment move ups and not just the return of 737 flying to IAH. There is a strong possibility that this flying will be shifted to the 320 anyway. The "super seniority" would violate the seniority of ALL UNITED PILOTS.

 

Ok, let me explain what the other guys was trying to explain. Yes it does make a difference. It depends on if you want to stay in the base.

Vacancy bid happens first, one would presume the 737 guys see the bump coming, and no one bids the 320 vacancy. Therefore, other guys more junior will get bids into the IAH 320 base. If they are more junior, then more guys off the guppy will be able to use bumps into that category. Does it make a difference, maybe not in the long run, except for freezes.

This won't prevent possible secondary bumps, but my guess is that manpower has already planned some of that in their forecast. And, if the 320 is growing that fast, in addition to used 319's purchased, then it is possible there would be no secondary bumps at all.

Sorry if I am presuming the obvious. It will have the effect of some leveling of past out of seniority bids.

 

Well....that assumes A LOT about how any 320 bid would go. We've had a few recently and I don't see the Bus going super junior all of a sudden. Just not gonna happen.

I know PLENTY of non IAH based pilots that would bid it in a heartbeat.

 

Possibly, yes it assumes a lot, but it could happen. I just bought lottery tickets too. Just trying to illustrate why one before the other has consequences.

 

Ben is all about violating United pilot's seniority. He is only interested in what's good for Ben.

 

I have not seen what Ben is asking for. Is it close to the special deal that was given to the 747 ORD pilots when their base was moved to SFO a couple years ago?

 

Two completely different things.

That was a base closure and the contract doesn't have language for what to do if the company closes a base and reopens it again. So they wrote a LOA that covered all these situations since the contract didn't specially cover it.

Displacements are already covered in the contract. No reason for a carve out. Just let seniority work the way it is supposed to. They can bid back in when there are vacancies.

 

Base closures are certainly covered in the contract. Look at section 8-E-7-a. It specifically talks about "The equipment type is no longer flying in that base" then section 8-E (displacement rights) shall apply. This is exactly what happen to the ORD 747 pilots.

 

The reality is the IAH 737 population is far bigger than needed. I suppose it's difficult for some to realize that Houston is no longer the "favorite child" of the airline.

A little background pre-merger.....

Newark domicile was shrunk and Houston grew because EWR was seen as militant and filled with trouble makers. Of course it was sold as favor to the pilots as most wanted to be home in good ol' Texas. I don't recall many in Houston complaining back then with the influx of more staffing.

Eventually this will all balance out, but again the reality is the 737 is way over staffed in Houston. Enjoy the Airbus.

 

What special deal are you talking about? Grandfather rights are covered in the CBA