New CAL 737 Bases DEN / ORD

[100/hour/5y]

New bid is coming out JAN 2011... Manpower planning is loading it today... You can see the new bases under standing system bid..

ORD 737

DEN 737

It makes you wonder what else mgt plans to cancel in the T&A agreement?

 

[Andy]

Section 7-C.

 

[densoo]

DEN, ORD not there!

 

[Andy]

I don't know if you're referring to Section 8; unfortunately, it expired at the end of 2010 so it's already 'cancelled'.
They'll hold the UAL pilot population static - no recalls and no furloughs - except for attrition. All growth will occur on the CAL side. That will definitely void Section 7-C.

 

[ATRCA]

IAH A320 rumored as well.

 

[eaglesview]

I don't know if you're referring to Section 8; unfortunately, it expired at the end of 2010 so it's already 'cancelled'.
They'll hold the UAL pilot population static - no recalls and no furloughs - except for attrition. All growth will occur on the CAL side. That will definitely void Section 7-C.

1988/89 I was at Eastern and watched all of our flying go to CO. In fact while we were on strike I even got to watch CO pick up "new flying" like BOS ATL, PHL ATL ect. Now this crap. We will look like East West in a hurry.

 

[ATRCA]

1988/89 I was at Eastern and watched all of our flying go to CO. In fact while we were on strike I even got to watch CO pick up "new flying" like BOS ATL, PHL ATL ect. Now this crap. We will look like East West in a hurry.

Until one of our groups attempts to cut it's own deal with mgt, I don't see a correlation between Airways and UCal. No system bid has been posted with new bases. These are rumors at this point. There have been a number of aircraft utilization changes in the last several months. Some have gone the way of CAL and some have gone to UAL. There will be more in the future. If our groups elect to bicker and fight with one another because of the decisions our management team makes than we deserve our fate.


EDIT;
It just occurred to me that you may not have been referring to East/West as in USA E/W. If not, than my post is without the proper context.

 

[Andy]

1988/89 I was at Eastern and watched all of our flying go to CO. In fact while we were on strike I even got to watch CO pick up "new flying" like BOS ATL, PHL ATL ect. Now this crap. We will look like East West in a hurry.

This will continue to happen until there's a JCBA. Our unions negotiated a TPA with sunset provisions that favor management. Management is not going to pass up the 'opportunity' to shift flying to the lower cost side of the operation prior to a JCBA being signed.
While I think that management expected to be further along with the integration process at this point in time, I don't think that they intentionally negotiated the TPA in bad faith. However, they are going to shift flying to the lowest cost side of the operation. How much does the expiration of section 8 alone save the company in profit sharing?

This shift in flying will continue to happen until a JCBA is signed. However, I don't see this as a repeat of Eastern in the late 80s because after the JCBA is signed, everyone will be on the same payscale and work rules. The JCBA will happen but right now management has no incentive to move quickly on it.

 

[whatitdoing?]

Andy, you guys had 500 furlough letters that was mailed or just about to be mailed just prior to the merger announcement and then rescinded. I don't think stagnation is or was the issue. I would say retraction in all honesty. Growth was already happening before, during, and after this merger.

 

[Andy]

Andy, you guys had 500 furlough letters that was mailed or just about to be mailed just prior to the merger announcement and then rescinded. I don't think stagnation is or was the issue. I would say retraction in all honesty. Growth was already happening before, during, and after this merger.

The UAL side of the fence was trimmed to make CAL and UAL a better fit, including getting past regulatory hurdles. If I had been calling the shots on the merger, I would also do all of the trimming on the UAL side due to it being a higher cost operation.
Whether we're talking CAL or UAL pilots/crews/planes, it's all just widgets to management. If the profit margin was higher on the UAL side, all of the cuts would have happened on the CAL side of the fence.

 

[whatitdoing?]

The UAL side wasn't trimmed to make it a better fit. It was trimmed because of financial reason tied to not being productive enough in their eyes and years of mismanagement. Higher cost operation or higher waste operation? I agree with you that it's just widgets and they don't care about us. As far as profit margins, I don't know. I seem to remember UAL side making more money, but I don't know if it's just because of size or trimming the fat. But our growth was planned, our expansion was planned, and our ac deliveries were planned. All I can remember is furlough and cuts planned along with financial futures in question. I'm not bashing you or any other UAL pilot. I'm on board with all you guys, but to say that we're the cause of your reduction isn't accurate.

 

[waveflyer]

Andy-
Got a cliff notes version of what's delaying the jcba?
I have heard that mgmt is doing it's best to delay and fracture the two against each other- but that's just hearsay

 

[Andy]

Wave, my understanding is that it's due to unforeseen IT and infrastructure issues. Those issues don't allow the two sides to operate as one yet.
For management, the cost of a new contract is somewhere in the ballpark of $600 million annually. If there's no positive impact to the bottom line of a new contract, why would the company rush in and sign a new contract? Like it or not, they're keeping expenses down until they need to implement a combined pilot workforce.

Since UCH has started to hire UAL furloughees at CAL, there's no incentive for them to recall those same pilots to the UAL side of the fence and then have to train other UAL furloughees on the CAL side. Now that the training pipeline is open on the CAL side of the fence, it would be very expensive to open the training pipeline on the UAL side of the fence.
Management will simply turn back 757 leases on the UAL side of the fence to keep the UAL pilot population static - no furloughs and no recalls.

The fastest way to a JCBA is getting past all of the IT and other integration issues.

 

[nimtz]

Andy, you guys had 500 furlough letters that was mailed or just about to be mailed just prior to the merger announcement and then rescinded.

Proof? First time I've heard this one.

 

[whatitdoing?]

Got it initially from a United crew in YVR. The FO was a few from the bottom and said that he thought he was done because he and 500 or so others got their letters with marching orders. He said the merger announcement came and it was cancelled. We toasted to luck over a few beers and he said he just wanted some stability in his life and for his family. I had a very good response from him and the Captain. Actually had a good time. It was nice to see how we all wanted the same thing. I then asked one of our local reps in IAH during a local meeting and they confirmed it as what they were told.

 

[bpapaDC8]

Both sides were right sized for the merger. Sadly, the United side was trimmed by parking the entire 737 fleet plus a few 747's for good measure.

From the horses mouth for those interested.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=1483922036

 

[lemtjones]

Got it initially from a United crew in YVR. The FO was a few from the bottom and said that he thought he was done because he and 500 or so others got their letters with marching orders. He said the merger announcement came and it was cancelled. We toasted to luck over a few beers and he said he just wanted some stability in his life and for his family. I had a very good response from him and the Captain. Actually had a good time. It was nice to see how we all wanted the same thing. I then asked one of our local reps in IAH during a local meeting and they confirmed it as what they were told.

There is a mis-interpretation going on. There have never been letters out to more than the 1437 originally planned furloughs that resulted from the parking of 100 aircraft in 2008. As a part of the voluntary furlough reduction program, 448 individuals who initially received involuntary furlough notices were not then furloughed. The last furlough date was November 11, 2009. No furlough notices were ever given subsequent to that date. You can find all of this information by accessing Skynet, then Flight Operations, then Recall and Furlough Information. As to your assertion that these furloughs were undertaken "because of financial reason" that is also wholly inaccurate.

 

[Jetjockey]

New bid is coming out JAN 2011... Manpower planning is loading it today... You can see the new bases under standing system bid..

ORD 737

DEN 737

It makes you wonder what else mgt plans to cancel in the T&A agreement?

They way I read the language in the Transition Agreement is both parties have to agree to terminate the agreement in sections or as a whole.

 

[145BOSS]

The sections regarding new bases expires on December 31st, so it would have to be voided.

 

[Andy]

13-A. Partial Termination.​

​

Unless the Parties agree otherwise, the Airline Parties
may jointly terminate the provisions of Sections 4-D (Domiciles), 7-A (Furlough
with regard to United Pilots only), 7-C (Flying Ratios), 7-D (Domicile and Base
Protection), and 9 (ALPA Travel), individually or collectively, at any time on or
after December 31, 2011, if the parties have not reached a tentative agreement on a​

JCBA by that date.


Either side can terminate 4-D, 7-A, 7-C, 7-D, and 9 after 31 Dec with no JCBA. Needless to say, the only party that would want to terminate any of those sections is management.

 

[SoCentralRain]

Both sides were right sized for the merger. Sadly, the United side was trimmed by parking the entire 737 fleet plus a few 747's for good measure.

From the horses mouth for those interested.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=1483922036

Bingo. At about the 9:24 mark, Glenn Tilton states he "right-sized the operation" to make the DOJ issue evaporate. This right-sizing was the parking of 100 aircraft on the UAL side, and the furlough of 1436 of my brothers and sisters--and myself.

Been on furlough almost 8 years total. And the clock is running.

SCR

 

[Chairman]

Both sides were right sized for the merger. Sadly, the United side was trimmed by parking the entire 737 fleet plus a few 747's for good measure.

From the horses mouth for those interested.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=1483922036

Yeah they said they parked the 737 because they could not make money with paid off airplanes due the the high operating costs.......Funny still see lots of 737's in Denver someone is making money with them

 

[whatitdoing?]

There is a mis-interpretation going on. There have never been letters out to more than the 1437 originally planned furloughs that resulted from the parking of 100 aircraft in 2008. As a part of the voluntary furlough reduction program, 448 individuals who initially received involuntary furlough notices were not then furloughed. The last furlough date was November 11, 2009. No furlough notices were ever given subsequent to that date. You can find all of this information by accessing Skynet, then Flight Operations, then Recall and Furlough Information. As to your assertion that these furloughs were undertaken "because of financial reason" that is also wholly inaccurate.

Lem, I appreciate ur input. But, besides techical terms, what's the difference between getting notice of an involuntary furlough and getting a letter of furlough. I get what ur saying, but the involuntary furlough was going to turn into an actual furlough if not because of the merger. United/CAL didn't want to furlough if they didn't know the staffing requirements. If the merger wasnt announced, there would be 448 more furloughs. Listen, my discussion was with a rep and crew.....and basically said the same thing. Besides making your technical point, the issue is that 448 pilots were on the way out. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Jetjockey]

13-A. Partial Termination.​

Unless the Parties agree otherwise, the Airline Parties
may jointly terminate the provisions of Sections 4-D (Domiciles), 7-A (Furlough
with regard to United Pilots only), 7-C (Flying Ratios), 7-D (Domicile and Base
Protection), and 9 (ALPA Travel), individually or collectively, at any time on or
after December 31, 2011, if the parties have not reached a tentative agreement on a​

JCBA by that date.


Either side can terminate 4-D, 7-A, 7-C, 7-D, and 9 after 31 Dec with no JCBA. Needless to say, the only party that would want to terminate any of those sections is management.

I'm reading "jointly terminate" as in all parties. The "individually or collectively" pertains to the sections which can be terminated. Maybe I'm incorrect on my understanding.

 

[chppr5]

Lem, I appreciate ur input. But, besides techical terms, what's the difference between getting notice of an involuntary furlough and getting a letter of furlough. I get what ur saying, but the involuntary furlough was going to turn into an actual furlough if not because of the merger. United/CAL didn't want to furlough if they didn't know the staffing requirements. If the merger wasnt announced, there would be 448 more furloughs. Listen, my discussion was with a rep and crew.....and basically said the same thing. Besides making your technical point, the issue is that 448 pilots were on the way out. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, you are wrong. The top 448 involuntary were saved by 448 voluntary furlough reguests. There were not an additional 448 on top of the initial 1400+. So the merger didn't save any jobs.

 

[whatitdoing?]

Yes, you are wrong. The top 448 involuntary were saved by 448 voluntary furlough reguests. There were not an additional 448 on top of the initial 1400+. So the merger didn't save any jobs.

So were 448 pilots still given the voluntary furlough or not?

 

[whatitdoing?]

There is a mis-interpretation going on. There have never been letters out to more than the 1437 originally planned furloughs that resulted from the parking of 100 aircraft in 2008. As a part of the voluntary furlough reduction program, 448 individuals who initially received involuntary furlough notices were not then furloughed. The last furlough date was November 11, 2009. No furlough notices were ever given subsequent to that date. You can find all of this information by accessing Skynet, then Flight Operations, then Recall and Furlough Information. As to your assertion that these furloughs were undertaken "because of financial reason" that is also wholly inaccurate.

Lem, come on now. Are you saying that your furloughs weren't tied to financial reasons? So if pilots worked for free, they'd still be furloughed because they .........inhale too much oxygen? My point being is that United furloughed for many reasons that were all tied to financial reasons. The 100 a/c parked were a result of the 70 seaters that your union sold you on. Why would a major airline outsource flying to another airline? It's cheaper, plain and simple. Unless you have protections, it'll happen again and again. If we relax scope on this JCBA, you'll see another 1400 pilots furloughed. Management doesn't care about you or me. It all comes down to money. So how am I wholly inaccurate?

 

[RT8VA]

I don't understand why no one wants to believe a thing Tilton says until it supports the theory that he right sized UAL. Wouldn't have any thing to do with all the 70 seat rjs flown by your regionals that aided in the reduction of the 737 fleet. Tilton is a pos and there is always lies mixed in with truth this is no different.
The seniority list will be arbitrated 100% so this is a meaningless argument as to who got furloughed and why, we need to stick together get a good contract and move forward no matter who wanted or didn't want the merger.

 

[whatitdoing?]

I don't understand why no one wants to believe a thing Tilton says until it supports the theory that he right sized UAL. Wouldn't have any thing to do with all the 70 seat rjs flown by your regionals that aided in the reduction of the 737 fleet. Tilton is a pos and there is always lies mixed in with truth this is no different.
The seniority list will be arbitrated 100% so this is a meaningless argument as to who got furloughed and why, we need to stick together get a good contract and move forward no matter who wanted or didn't want the merger.

Good point. My argument was in response to above statements that the United side was or is currently stagnant because of CAL. My point is that it had nothing to do with 'right' sizing for a merger. My argument has nothing to do with SLI. It will be arbitrated 100 percent. United will make their case and CAL will make their case........shake it around and we have SLI. Nothing I or anyone can do about it.

 

[Andy]

I'm reading "jointly terminate" as in all parties. The "individually or collectively" pertains to the sections which can be terminated. Maybe I'm incorrect on my understanding.

Which sections do you read as being able to be terminated "individually or collectively"?