Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- United (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/)

- - 17-03v (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/98214-17-03v.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249625)

Well until they stop forcing flying into IAH and CLE because they can't seem to pull the trigger and put them out of their misery DEN will grow through outstation flying. There are more mainline flights at DEN than I have ever seen, however the base can't grow until the flying is brought from IAH and CLE.

A lot of people here see the big picture and if you don't you may think we are cynical and hate what we do and you may get your feelings hurt. We have more unity at United than most other airlines and most people I work with enjoy their job, and that hasn't always been the case. This forum is full of people that can't handle bull****......DEN is/has grown prove to me that it has not.

Your comments about IAH and especially CLE are exactly my point. The company continually says they want to grow DEN but don't have the resources. On the other hand they say CLE is dying (in not so many words) and IAH is shrinking... for now / the next few years. Yet it seems very little is changing.

These are the type of posts that are helpful.

Can you elaborate on your last sentence? I'm not sure I follow you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249641)

My point is that DEN is growing and mainline is increasing but the flying is not being done by DEN pilots. You seemed skeptical of DEN growth because the bids aren't growing DEN.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249644)

My point is that DEN is growing and mainline is increasing but the flying is not being done by DEN pilots. You seemed skeptical of DEN growth because the bids aren't growing DEN.

So if CLE is on life support and IAH is, for now, not doing as well... why not grow DEN as a hub instead of having others do the flying. That, when it comes down to it, is what I'm "whining" about. [emoji16] It seems more politically based then fiscally based.

And since we're actually having an informative discussion, and BTW your insight is greatly appreciated, how is it SFO comes up 91 FOs short and can still operate? And what is/can the company do to alleviate this shortfall?

Seems like overinflated staffing perhaps?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249664)

So if CLE is on life support and IAH is, for now, not doing as well... why not grow DEN s a hub instead of having others do the flying. That, when it comes down to it, is what I'm "whining" about. [emoji16] It seems more politically based then fiscally based.

Until they close CLE, which I have no idea why they haven't, and fix IAHs overataffing once and for all by offering a displacement off all seats in all fleets, they will continue to poorly utilize the fleet. The company can't allow a natural flow of aircraft and pilots when seats are over staffed. Just look at IAH 787 pilots flying SFO-TPE last month. You think that's efficient for the company? And it lowers lines and QOL for SFO 787 pilots. Overstaffing affects every pilot in the system negatively, the only pilots that win are the ones that want to be in The over staffed seat.

The DEN base is in the middle of the country. It is very easy to get pilots from other bases into the system. IAH-DEN-OMA spend the next 2 days bouncing around then OMA-DEN-IAH. The DEN base will grow pilots through the years as IAH and CLE pilots retire, or the company grows a pair and fixes the staffing issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249677)

The lateral bids don't have to be activated right away so you keep the pilots tell the last minute while you hire and train. You also run thin on reserves and use reserves from other bases to cover the flying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249664)

It's totally fiscally based. The it's pretty rare for the company to NOT select the lower cost option.

In the case of CLE and IAH, any pilots displaced from those bases would be eligible for paid moves ($$$) and can bump into anything else they can hold which means a potential of cascading training events and further bumps ($$$).

Thus, the company is willing to let things ride out in IAH assuming the oil downturn is a blip and is content to let CLE shrink via attrition.

If the underlaying factors change significantly and it reaches a financial crossover point, expect the company to change the plan accordingly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249685)

Exactly! And it doesn't take 20+ years here to see that.

But what exactly does "growing a pair" entail for the company? What risks are there that is keeping them from doing so? Or perhaps better put, what rewards are there in not doing so? There's more to it. Agree or disagree with the decision, more than anything, the why is what most want to know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249607)

The criticism is personally directed.

My post stated that in multiple company news sources it has been said...
"Denver is a growing market."

"Southwest wants to make Denver their crown jewel and those are fighting words for United."

"Denver is the most profitable domestic hub."

Etc...

From the multiple company posts, it seems as if Denver would be opening wide up. It is not. The vacancies going in are mostly just replacing those leaving.

But if you guys want to continually throw personally directed critism (whining comments) fine. I'll keep pointing it out. Even the guy that posted about not getting into IAH got flack.

When it comes down to it 90% of what is posted is from guys that are ****ed off at the company, the union, Legacy United, Legacy Continental, and on and on.

This lack of solidarity for each other is a big part of what makes so many leave this forum. It can be used for so much more; to help each other out, to pass information along, etc... but instead it's throw the punch first before you're hit with one. Ask the next guy you fly with what they think of APC. The answer is always the same... what I stated above. Instead this forum is left with the same dozen guys bringing up the same stuff. Just look at this thread, it has digresses as well. Surprisingly we haven't yet talked about how terrible the "guppy" is and how awesome the 757 is.

Well, you do seem to be new in your sense of DEN. Most of us have seen us in and out of DEN in a big way many times. It seems like even though it makes money, they don't know what to do with it. It shouldn't fit as a hub, or I should say, their concept of a hub.

So, one marketing manager says, we go in to DEN, the next manager sees no improved profits, we shrink. Then the next one....you get the idea. See Saw for decades. We are staying with TK there, another widget for DEN, and still marketing doesn't know how to deal with it.

So, not surprising even though DEN is making money, they are not effectively growing it--and until they meaningfully reduce the RJ's there, UAL won't increase mainline flying. What you say?? We just deferred a bunch of guppies?? You see where this is going again....:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA Slammer (Post 2249677)

Seems like overinflated staffing perhaps?

Nope, it reflects the need to "fund" positions for new hires. Since SFO is a "junior" base there are pilots moving up and out constantly. It becomes a sort of self fulfilling prophecy based on the necessity to provide class drops based on unfilled vacancies.