Is ALPA Really Going To Allow This To Happen At UAL??

[ualdriver]

I hope you are more upset about this than your post conveys. Did you see what happened with Midwest Airlines? If you guys don't stop this at UAL, we will all be on the street in short order. In this scenario, the guy flying the 777 or 744 is no longer safe from outsourcing. THIS IS DIFFERENT!

Stop what, Roswell? Stop United management from taking UAL airplanes and flying them with non-UAL pilots? OK, we've done that.

Stop Aer Lingus pilots from giving up their jets so that non Aer Lingus pilots don't fly them? Ummm.....OK. How do you suggest we do that?

Stop all code sharing? Ummmm......OK. If you're upset about code sharing then why are you directing that comment only to UAL (you said "you guys")? What airline do you work for and what are you doing on your end?

 

[ROSWELL41]

Stop what, Roswell? Stop United management from taking UAL airplanes and flying them with non-UAL pilots? OK, we've done that.

Stop Aer Lingus pilots from giving up their jets so that non Aer Lingus pilots don't fly them? Ummm.....OK. How do you suggest we do that?

Stop all code sharing? Ummmm......OK. If you're upset about code sharing then why are you directing that comment only to UAL (you said "you guys")? What airline do you work for and what are you doing on your end?

Yes this is a codeshare. You are correct. I work for a carrier that UAL codeshares with also. We have taken over a large portion of UAL's domestic flying. I want to fly for UAL or another legacy someday. If this 'trial balloon' is successful, I doubt there will be many viable legacies left to work for.

Let's examine some facts about this codeshare:
-Aer Lingus will supply A330 aircraft.
-The new carrier will fly with UAL/Aer Lingus code from IAD-MAD to start.
-A new air carrier certificate is being started, will it be a U.S. carrier or an EU carrier?
-Non UAL or Aer Lingus pilots will be hired to fly these routes.

Look, many pilots who have long since retired saw no harm in allowing some CRJs to fly at Comair in 1994. 15 years later the majority of legacy domestic flights are on 'regional jet' type aircraft. This is the proverbial camel sticking its nose under the tent. I am not picking on you guys at UAL. It just happens that unfortunately, your management has decided to try this out. You guys are the first to see this type of outsourcing and your failure to stop it could be catastrophic. Just like in 1994 with the CRJ, the power is in the hands of the mainline pilot group.

 

[ualdriver]

You guys are the first to see this type of outsourcing and your failure to stop it could be catastrophic. Just like in 1994 with the CRJ, the power is in the hands of the mainline pilot group.

Roswell41-

This issue had everyone's full attention- weeks ago when this issue first came out. Why it's suddenly getting attention now on this forum is beyond me. And we have protections in our current contract that prevent what happened to the Aer Lingus guys from happening to us. However, concerning codeshares, the camel is already in the tent unfortunately. I suspect mainline pilots will have as much success rolling back existing codeshares as they will rolling back RJ flying.

 

[eaglesview]

Stop what, Roswell? Stop United management from taking UAL airplanes and flying them with non-UAL pilots? OK, we've done that.

Stop Aer Lingus pilots from giving up their jets so that non Aer Lingus pilots don't fly them? Ummm.....OK. How do you suggest we do that?

Stop all code sharing? Ummmm......OK. If you're upset about code sharing then why are you directing that comment only to UAL (you said "you guys")? What airline do you work for and what are you doing on your end?

Are you trying to convey that you are OK with this? Is it OK if ANA since they are a code share partner, leases a 747 and starts flying SFO HNK with non union pilots from a third party?? This is different, very different. Niether code share partner if flying the airplane. That is different and it is huge and so far WE(UAL Pilots)/ALPA have failed to stop it.

 

[ROSWELL41]

Everyone is rehashing this because the Chicago Tribune ran a full page story about this on the front page of its business section yesterday.

 

[ualdriver]

Are you trying to convey that you are OK with this? Is it OK if ANA since they are a code share partner, leases a 747 and starts flying SFO HNK with non union pilots from a third party?? This is different, very different. Niether code share partner if flying the airplane. That is different and it is huge and so far WE(UAL Pilots)/ALPA have failed to stop it.

That I'm OK with what, eagle? Aren't you an ALPA basher anyway? If guys like you had your way, ALPA wouldn't be on the property and instead of this just being another codeshare, we'd have non-UA pilots flying UA airplanes on our end, too. So it's kind of pointless debating an issue such as this with a guy like you, is it not? ALPA is a "limp" organization that can't do anything, right? So what is there to debate with you?

 

[ualdriver]

Everyone is rehashing this because the Chicago Tribune ran a full page story about this on the front page of its business section yesterday.

Ah. I didn't know that.

 

[eaglesview]

That I'm OK with what, eagle? Aren't you an ALPA basher anyway? If guys like you had your way, ALPA wouldn't be on the property and instead of this just being another codeshare, we'd have non-UA pilots flying UA airplanes on our end, too. So it's kind of pointless debating an issue such as this with a guy like you, is it not? ALPA is a "limp" organization that can't do anything, right? So what is there to debate with you?

I am an ALPA basher make no mistake about it. However maybe I have not made myself clear. My beef is with ALPA national not our volunteer union reps. I do believe we could be doing just as well in house without ALPA. In the end if you are indeed an United Pilot then surell you can see the difference between this and other code share agreements that are in place.

 

[ualdriver]

I am an ALPA basher make no mistake about it. However maybe I have not made myself clear. My beef is with ALPA national not our volunteer union reps. I do believe we could be doing just as well in house without ALPA. In the end if you are indeed an United Pilot then surell you can see the difference between this and other code share agreements that are in place.

Yes I can. Don't mistake me trying to address/explain this issue and not jumping up and down and getting all emotional about the issue as some lack of concern. Obviously with openers getting exchanged next month, negotiations starting after that, and mediation starting (more than likely) at the end of August, this needs to be addressed.

However, I don't see how you can be upset about this issue on one hand, and then say you have a beef with ALPA National and think we could do "just as well in house" without ALPA. ALPA is the ONLY organization representing pilots' interests at the national level with any reasonable chance of influence. If something like this isn't something that needs to be addressed at both the LOCAL and NATIONAL level, I don't know what is.

 

[eaglesview]

Yes I can. Don't mistake me trying to address/explain this issue and not jumping up and down and getting all emotional about the issue as some lack of concern. Obviously with openers getting exchanged next month, negotiations starting after that, and mediation starting (more than likely) at the end of August, this needs to be addressed.

However, I don't see how you can be upset about this issue on one hand, and then say you have a beef with ALPA National and think we could do "just as well in house" without ALPA. ALPA is the ONLY organization representing pilots' interests at the national level with any reasonable chance of influence. If something like this isn't something that needs to be addressed at both the LOCAL and NATIONAL level, I don't know what is.

Ok you have your history with ALPA and I have mine. I do belive we could be doing just as well in house as is being shown at SW and AA. All that is niether here nor there. If you are right and ALPA is the best way forward then great, I would love to be wrong. In my opinion they , ALPA, are in bed with to many pilot groups that do not have our best intrest in mind. All this has been hashed through before. In the end it is the pilot group themselves that will make it or not. The tie tack is not relevant. For this season I laugh at the excitement the tranny folks on here have for ALPA. If the pilot group stays the same so will the result.

With that said good luck to us both going forward. Strap in it's going to be a wild ride.

 

[ROSWELL41]

So how does UAL ALPA plan to stop this? Could this be ploy to get concessions on the low end scope in exchange for dropping this assault on the upper end scope? Ex. "Let us give the ERJ-190/CRJ-1000 to the regionals and we will get rid of this A330 deal."

 

[eaglesview]

So how does UAL ALPA plan to stop this? Could this be ploy to get concessions on the low end scope in exchange for dropping this assault on the upper end scope? Ex. "Let us give the ERJ-190/CRJ-1000 to the regionals and we will get rid of this A330 deal."

No one but the scumbags on Wacker drive could know the answer to those questions. Time will tell. In the end it's all about the scope as has been mentioned before.

 

[ualdriver]

So how does UAL ALPA plan to stop this? Could this be ploy to get concessions on the low end scope in exchange for dropping this assault on the upper end scope? Ex. "Let us give the ERJ-190/CRJ-1000 to the regionals and we will get rid of this A330 deal."

I can't imagine any situation where RJ scope would be relaxed further than it already has.

 

[Cobra17]

Of course they will let it happen.

Their bag of tricks only consists of giant blow-up rats and "catchy" slogans.

Don't forget the full page ads telling everyone how dysfunctional the company is.

 

[eaglesview]

Don't forget the full page ads telling everyone how dysfunctional the company is.

The company is dysfunctional. Not much question there.