My God, everyone here has been bitten by the shiny new jet syndrome or it's variations.

You all believe the company will comply with new sections of the contract? They know they will have to give to get what they want. Everyone seems to have forgotten that the company has and continues to violate the contract when ever the whim strikes!

You are all talking and speculating about what this, what that, and it all means nothing if they don't comply with the contract. They have repeatedly demonstrated they will violate it every time they want.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, until the company demonstrates they will comply with the current deal, I for one, do not believe they will comply with anything new they negotiate.

Compliance has to start now to even consider an extension. We are close enough to openers, and have a very narrow window for extension talks, why not just open early? I very much oppose any talk of extension until they comply and fully implement our current deal.

Call me jaded and cynical, been here a very long time, I just don't believe it.

 

The company needs adjustments to FRMS and 117 to take advantage of the capabilities of the 787/350/777ER for new markets. I think they just threw the new narrow body into the conversation to distract everyone from their real need. Mission accomplished.

 

I'm puzzled by the philosophy of "I refuse to get a new contract until they start respecting the last one"..... especially when we are talking about an IMPROVED contract. If it was concessions, I understand. I read someone post that they absolutely refuse to consider a new contract until the IT department is fixed. Umm..... that could be 2025. So you want to hold up contract improvements to make a point? That makes no sense to me at all. Not trying to be disrespectful, but contract compliance has ALWAYS been an issue for as long as I've been here. And I'm sure always will be. I wouldn't think that would be a reason for not negotiating contract improvements.

As far as SJS. I highly doubt it. I'd wager that 90% of the UAL pilots on the present seniority list will not benefit 1 ounce from having 100 seaters on the property because the pay is so low there is no incentive to bid it. Doesn't mean it's not an important piece of the contract pie, just that I don't think it's "enticing" to those of us that have been here awhile.

 

Perhaps. But I think it's in OUR best interests as well to come up with a solution that makes the A350/787/777ER workable at United Airlines to the utmost of their capacity. That makes for a more profitable and viable airline long term, which is something WE want WAYYYY more than the CEO of the month wants. HOWEVER, they ARE going to have to pay for it in some way.....

 

I vote no on anything until we get better coffee.

 

Let's open this bag - you appear to be pushing for a deal that you know nothing about. I don't think anybody at the company or ALPA said anything other than the company wants to discuss some things. Meaning there is no deal on the table and yet, you want to buy the pig in poke and do a deal. Why - are you shilling for the company?

 

Couldn't agree more. If we refuse to come up with a way that allows the potential of these aircraft to be utilized, then the flying will go someplace else. The massive orders by our international competition speaks for itself. I just read that Singapore Airlines has ordered a long range variant of the A350-900 to serve LAX and JFK direct from SIN. The JFK flight was tried for a while with an A340-600, but was dropped in 2013 because the 4 engine economics were poor. The A350-900 ULR is the aircraft that can make a market like JFK-SIN profitable and sustainable.

 

Hahahahahah!!! Fair enough!!!!!!

 

WWDD?

(What would Dubinsky do)

He always seemed to get the most out of the leverage that was available at the time.

 

Not at all. How could I be pushing for a deal when there is no deal to push for? What I'm pushing for is an open negotiation and dialogue without the restrictions some folks on here want. My personal opinion is THAT is the way to achieve the most gains.... by getting creative and giving the negotiating committee the tools they need to come up with the best possible deal. There are three levels of protection from getting anything shoved down your throat so relax. The beauty is that we don't NEED any deal. So we have the benefit of having some leverage and exploiting that leverage.

I think if you read my posts you'll realize that what you said at the bottom of your post is just dumb. In no way shape or form am I for taking "concessions". You contend that realizing that adjusting some things in the contract could be beneficial to both parties is management shilling?? Sorry you feel that way. Seems narrow minded to me