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)

Scrappy 11-25-2016 10:52 AM


Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249765)
Yeah well I wonder how much it cost to displace IAH 737 CAs to 787 FO then back to 737 CA and 777 FO then back to 787 FO......

The company is tired of it because they screwed it up from the beginning and now they are just saying screw it and running 50 CAs fat on the 737 in IAH. How much does that cost?

Much less than 400 new training slots. And like I said the O&G industry is cyclical -that's fact driven. The economy can substantially shift with the new pro business, pro oil exploration administration coming up. The current administration was anti-exploration and anti-fracking which has hurt the big O&G companies based in Houston...again factual. I think things will get better for industry in the near term. Houston can get some substantial gains shortly.

cadetdrivr 11-25-2016 11:05 AM


Originally Posted by Scrappy (Post 2249766)
The current administration was anti-exploration and anti-fracking which has hurt the big O&G companies based in Houston...again factual. I think things will get better for industry in the near term. Houston can get some substantial gains shortly.

Ummm....the big fracking boom (2009-2014) occurred during the current administration, no? For a bunch of anti-business, anti-exploration types they sure hurt the fracking industry. ;)

Considering that ultimately the oil business is driven by the marketplace price of oil I'm not sure what the new administration can do to "help" the oil industy other that policies that support higher oil prices. That's perhaps good for the loacal IAH economy but bad for the airline as a whole.

Ironically the fracking boom is largely responsible for the drop in prices in the first place.

MasterOfPuppets 11-25-2016 11:17 AM


Originally Posted by Scrappy (Post 2249766)
Much less than 400 new training slots. And like I said the O&G industry is cyclical -that's fact driven. The economy can substantially shift with the new pro business, pro oil exploration administration coming up. The current administration was anti-exploration and anti-fracking which has hurt the big O&G companies based in Houston...again factual. I think things will get better for industry in the near term. Houston can get some substantial gains shortly.

You either fix the problem or you don't.......if you don't fix the problem all line pilots pay the price.

APC225 11-25-2016 11:36 AM

Hervé Lavenant
 

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249685)
Until they close CLE, which I have no idea why they haven't...,.

CLE probably open until 2019, straight from Hervé Lavenant (the guy who puts out the bids). A deal with city when we merged was to maintain "a presence" until then. The crews are that, plus the mx perhaps. Subject to change.

Scrappy 11-25-2016 11:51 AM


Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249771)
You either fix the problem or you don't.......if you don't fix the problem all line pilots pay the price.

Just curious but how are you personally paying a price right now? Not trying to be flippant but I don't see an issue if one, a cyclical change for the positive could occur in the near future and two, do you not hurt 1,000 plus pilots by creating a base flush bid? Are they not line pilots?

MasterOfPuppets 11-25-2016 12:01 PM


Originally Posted by Scrappy (Post 2249786)
Just curious but how are you personally paying a price right now? Not trying to be flippant but I don't see an issue if one, a cyclical change for the positive could occur in the near future and two, do you not hurt 1,000 plus pilots by creating a base flush bid? Are they not line pilots?

Well SFO. Is not flying CDG we lost TPE for a month......this hurts all SFO pilots people that could hold lines don't, people that could hold better flying can't, less pilots in base.....hurts the pilots from the bottom up except for the 150 pilots that are in the IAH 787 FO seat

AllenAllert 11-25-2016 03:01 PM


Originally Posted by sleeves (Post 2248988)
I am glad to hear that you will oppose guys finagling their way back if the age is ever changed.

I didn't say that. It will likely never affect me but I've been a strong supporter of elimination of the age discrimination for a long time. I don't mind seeing fellow pilots continue flying at any age. Current standards would apply to all. (Also a propionate of lowering the age requirement for the ATP to the age to obtain a drivers license.)

We're hiring guys off the street at 60+ - what's wrong with letting them continue their time at United. There's no way of determining why a guy needs or wants to extend his career at United(their airline) but in the spirit of unionism, I say get rid of the age discrimination and negotiate a fair way to determine how they should be allowed to return after forced retirement.

The political environment is ripe to finally rid ourselves of this age discrimination - GO RED TEAM!

Scrappy 11-25-2016 03:46 PM


Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets (Post 2249793)
Well SFO. Is not flying CDG we lost TPE for a month......this hurts all SFO pilots people that could hold lines don't, people that could hold better flying can't, less pilots in base.....hurts the pilots from the bottom up except for the 150 pilots that are in the IAH 787 FO seat

So that's forced flying (on one fleet (and a small one at that)) during winter months that will probably be short term yet a flush bid is a permanent move that affects over 1k pilots permanently. I still don't see the logic behind your reasoning. Plus the training and logistic costs to the company, which would be astronomical.

Grumble 11-25-2016 04:33 PM


Originally Posted by AllenAllert (Post 2249887)
I didn't say that. It will likely never affect me but I've been a strong supporter of elimination of the age discrimination for a long time. I don't mind seeing fellow pilots continue flying at any age. Current standards would apply to all. (Also a propionate of lowering the age requirement for the ATP to the age to obtain a drivers license.)

We're hiring guys off the street at 60+ - what's wrong with letting them continue their time at United. There's no way of determining why a guy needs or wants to extend his career at United(their airline) but in the spirit of unionism, I say get rid of the age discrimination and negotiate a fair way to determine how they should be allowed to return after forced retirement.

The political environment is ripe to finally rid ourselves of this age discrimination - GO RED TEAM!

So what... guys can just go out on LTD indefinitely?

AllenAllert 11-25-2016 06:11 PM


Originally Posted by Grumble (Post 2249953)
So what... guys can just go out on LTD indefinitely?


I guess you'll vote for it then?

I think LTD ends at mandatory age as it is today - not sure.

You pay more for insurance as age increases, LTD may have to be adjusted for the inevitable.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:59 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands