Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-12-2015, 08:43 AM   #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
zippinbye's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: 7ER/A
Posts: 501
Default 100 Seat A/C - Don't Grab For The Carrot!

Over at Delta we rejected our TA in July due to a myriad of issues, primarily concessions during positive financial times. We were also dangled a "carrot" in the form of bringing at least 20 EMB jets to the mainline, along with 40 more 737s. The 100 seat pay rates were disproportionally low compared to the rest of our categories. Our smallest A/C, the B-717, pays the same as a DC-9, one iteration of which was a 68 seater not too many years ago, and the backbone of the fleet was at 100 seats. One school of thought dictates that the lowest captain pay rate must exceed the highest F/O pay rate. Even with substandard pay, I expect the EMBs would have been welcomed if the other areas of our TA were not so onerous.

But we all need to remember that the airline will purchase the aircraft required to support their business pursuits. We should never trade away other areas of a contract for the promise of new aircraft. This is especially true in the 100 seat arena. Given the staffing challenges in the regional ranks, there is pressure to operate these aircraft on the main line. Embrace the capture of affiliate flying, but don't pay for it. Get the pay rates right. Take carrots off the menu!
zippinbye is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 08:59 AM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 1,832
Default

There is not a pilot on property who is reaching for that carrot. We open SEC 6 in MAY. Our contract needs a lot more help then the 5 items being discussed.

If the company doesn't come to the table with a TA that literally blows every airline out of the water then we will be heading to SEC 6.

I expect the MEC to reject the proposal. Then I expect United management to go on an anti pilot/greedy pilot add campaign. They will tell pax and employees that the pilots are keeping us from flying to TLV and AKL and that we are going to have to differ acft orders if the pilots won't allow us to fly them. They will tell the FAs that there will be significant job loss due to no 100 seaters and the possible differing of acft.

Bottom line is I do not believe we will get to vote on anything by NOV 20th and we will spend the next however long being hated by all the employee groups because the pilots are destroying the airline.
MasterOfPuppets is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:26 AM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,248
Default

Why did UAL "offer" the 100 seat in these talks?

1. Most have pointed out the current contract limits for 76 seats are or have been reached.

2. It is highly likely UAL has already made a contractual commitment to purchase the 100 seat airplanes and now needs an agreement to fly them with UAL pilots.

It's not a carrot because for the most part current UAL pilots are flying what they want to any way. The only thing that will change is the opportunity for many to fly Captain who currently are too junior to do so.

Now back in the day the 747-400 was held up as a carrot in giving away the small jets and the MEC did bite. No one in their right mind would say today's talks are comparable to those of the past.

Personally I believe the UAL MEC did the right thing to enter into these negotiations with UAL. As many have already stated why wait for as long as 3 years when improvements are possibly on the table today.
Regularguy is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:53 AM   #4  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Regularguy View Post
Why did UAL "offer" the 100 seat in these talks?

1. Most have pointed out the current contract limits for 76 seats are or have been reached.

2. It is highly likely UAL has already made a contractual commitment to purchase the 100 seat airplanes and now needs an agreement to fly them with UAL pilots.

It's not a carrot because for the most part current UAL pilots are flying what they want to any way. The only thing that will change is the opportunity for many to fly Captain who currently are too junior to do so.

Now back in the day the 747-400 was held up as a carrot in giving away the small jets and the MEC did bite. No one in their right mind would say today's talks are comparable to those of the past.

Personally I believe the UAL MEC did the right thing to enter into these negotiations with UAL. As many have already stated why wait for as long as 3 years when improvements are possibly on the table today.
I agree with all except #2. They already have an agreement with the UAL pilots to fly the 100 seaters. They can order them right now if they want... no new agreement necessary. The pay scale is hideously low, but it is there.
gettinbumped is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:10 AM   #5  
Stuck Mic
 
Firsttimeflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,028
Default

I'll hold judgement until I see an actual proposal. At least wth this there shouldn't be any buried gems in the contract that are either not caught or not understood until after being ratified. At least the DAL guys caught wind of some serious concessions and voted accordingly.
I'm relatively happy with status quo. That being said, growth, reserve rule fixes, pay raises, righting some wrongs for furloughed guys and potential increase in QOL/extra $$ opportunities and I'm open to listening what the offer is.
Firsttimeflyer is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:30 AM   #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,248
Default

"They already have an agreement with the UAL pilots to fly the 100 seaters. They can order them right now if they want... no new agreement necessary. The pay scale is hideously low, but it is there."

Only within the scope of the agreement. What if UAL has another idea in mind that's a bit unique (maybe it's not a straight "buy and fly" deal) or outside the current agreement? We'll hear a lot more in then next month and a half about what was proposed and I think you will see why they asked for the negotiations.


"I'm relatively happy with status quo. "

I always want more money and time off.
Regularguy is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:40 AM   #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: Guppy CA
Posts: 714
Default

C-11 had an update detailing some of the discussions and expanded on some of the issues the company is dealing with in regards to our scope. They're in a quandry right now of their own making.

1-C-1-g. The Company is allowed to have 255 total 70/76 seat jets at the feeders. Of those 255, up to 153 may be 76-seat jets. The Company currently has approximately 100 76-seaters and 155 70-seaters. In order to increase the number of 76-seat jets and the total number from 255 in the feeder fleet, the company must first place a NSNA on the mainline. Pay attention here: in order to place a NSNA on the mainline, the Company must have no more than 102 70-seaters.

So they can add the 100 seaters now but they'd have to dump 53 70 seaters before they could add a single 76 seat a/c anyway.

Fortunately the MEC resolution allowing extension talks forbid the NC from talking about Section 1 expressly.
UALinIAH is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 11:13 AM   #8  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UALinIAH View Post
C-11 had an update detailing some of the discussions and expanded on some of the issues the company is dealing with in regards to our scope. They're in a quandry right now of their own making.

1-C-1-g. The Company is allowed to have 255 total 70/76 seat jets at the feeders. Of those 255, up to 153 may be 76-seat jets. The Company currently has approximately 100 76-seaters and 155 70-seaters. In order to increase the number of 76-seat jets and the total number from 255 in the feeder fleet, the company must first place a NSNA on the mainline. Pay attention here: in order to place a NSNA on the mainline, the Company must have no more than 102 70-seaters.

So they can add the 100 seaters now but they'd have to dump 53 70 seaters before they could add a single 76 seat a/c anyway.

Fortunately the MEC resolution allowing extension talks forbid the NC from talking about Section 1 expressly.
Very interesting.... Thanks for posting. Hadn't seen the C11 update
gettinbumped is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 12:18 PM   #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
LeeFXDWG's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UALinIAH View Post
C-11 had an update detailing some of the discussions and expanded on some of the issues the company is dealing with in regards to our scope. They're in a quandry right now of their own making.

1-C-1-g. The Company is allowed to have 255 total 70/76 seat jets at the feeders. Of those 255, up to 153 may be 76-seat jets. The Company currently has approximately 100 76-seaters and 155 70-seaters. In order to increase the number of 76-seat jets and the total number from 255 in the feeder fleet, the company must first place a NSNA on the mainline. Pay attention here: in order to place a NSNA on the mainline, the Company must have no more than 102 70-seaters.

So they can add the 100 seaters now but they'd have to dump 53 70 seaters before they could add a single 76 seat a/c anyway.

Fortunately the MEC resolution allowing extension talks forbid the NC from talking about Section 1 expressly.
As it should be!
LeeFXDWG is offline  
Old 10-12-2015, 03:10 PM   #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

How much leverage are we giving up in order to get a couple things fixed in a completely substandard contract? Once that leverage is gone, the company will stall the next contract.
SpecialTracking is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AirTran Pilots: Outsourcing Bad for Business all4114all Major 60 01-01-2010 06:55 AM
Fact about 100 Seat A/C's at Regionals Flyboy8784 Regional 42 05-30-2009 02:10 PM
100 Seat Jets now flown by Regional Carrier!! par8head Major 224 05-27-2009 01:19 PM
Annoying Airport Personalites vagabond Hangar Talk 68 04-23-2008 12:16 PM
Hey, where's my airline seat? vagabond Hangar Talk 1 02-01-2008 07:56 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:44 PM.