To ALL UNITED pilots courtesy of ALL UAX carriers and their pilots

[Freeze_gopher]

I'm going to say it again, UAX pilots were not consulted prior to this letter being sent. No one I have spoken to was aware that the letter was being written let alone the contents of the letter. I haven't spoken to or even heard of anyone that thinks that denying jumpseats is an appropriate thing to do. To be honest, the UALMEC should do nothing in response because UAX pilots are not going to deny Jumpseats. It sounds to me that UAX JSCs responded emotionally out frustration in issuing this letter. I appreciate the work that those folks do for us but, this wasn't smart, necessary, or well carried out. Even if the UALMEC does start denying us jumpseats, I still won't advocate denying jumpseats.
The UAX pilots didn't ask for this fight, we don't seem to be having much luck getting our JSC's to retract this letter. None of this needs to happen.

 

[Fly2AK]

Not likely. Our EMB170s will fill the market void on their own, and there won't be any jumpseat issues. Maybe there is some truth to the legend of the guppykiller, after all.

What market void do you think you will fill, your whole business plan is based off of fee for departure, YOU ARE A CONTRACT CARRIER NOT A STAND ALONE CARRIER.

 

[Freeze_gopher]

Mcnugget,

I don't like people attacking each other or posting stuff that is just supposed to anger or get a rise out of folks, even more so when it's not clever well thought out etc....so I'm just going to ignore you.

 

[eaglesview]

I think you have the wrong post, I had post #315 and said nothing about 4332 RJ flights. that was a couple post before mine.

My bad sorry.

 

[eaglesview]

I'm going to say it again, UAX pilots were not consulted prior to this letter being sent. No one I have spoken to was aware that the letter was being written let alone the contents of the letter. I haven't spoken to or even heard of anyone that thinks that denying jumpseats is an appropriate thing to do. To be honest, the UALMEC should do nothing in response because UAX pilots are not going to deny Jumpseats. It sounds to me that UAX JSCs responded emotionally out frustration in issuing this letter. I appreciate the work that those folks do for us but, this wasn't smart, necessary, or well carried out. Even if the UALMEC does start denying us jumpseats, I still won't advocate denying jumpseats.
The UAX pilots didn't ask for this fight, we don't seem to be having much luck getting our JSC's to retract this letter. None of this needs to happen.

I really don't think there is much to worry about. The reality is 99% of all pilots will help another one get to work. (scabs excluded) Unless directly asked not to allow UAX on I will always accept them. It is, in my opinion, highly unlikely it will come to that.

 

[Fly2AK]

I'm going to say it again, UAX pilots were not consulted prior to this letter being sent. No one I have spoken to was aware that the letter was being written let alone the contents of the letter. I haven't spoken to or even heard of anyone that thinks that denying jumpseats is an appropriate thing to do. To be honest, the UALMEC should do nothing in response because UAX pilots are not going to deny Jumpseats. It sounds to me that UAX JSCs responded emotionally out frustration in issuing this letter. I appreciate the work that those folks do for us but, this wasn't smart, necessary, or well carried out. Even if the UALMEC does start denying us jumpseats, I still won't advocate denying jumpseats.
The UAX pilots didn't ask for this fight, we don't seem to be having much luck getting our JSC's to retract this letter. None of this needs to happen.

Again, thanks. The problem is on this board most of the post about this letter have been UAX pilots in support of the ultimatum, you are one of the few that has vocalized your disagreement. I hope we can bump into more pilots like yourself.

 

[Fly2AK]

My bad sorry.

No problem.

 

[imacdog]

What market void do you think you will fill, your whole business plan is based off of fee for departure, YOUR A CONTRACT CARRIER NOT A STAND ALONE CARRIER.

They will fill the regional flying needs of whatever carrier swoops in to pick up the scraps if United fails. They have the ability to switch brand loyalties, you do not.

 

[McNugget]

What market void do you think you will fill, your whole business plan is based off of fee for departure, YOUR A CONTRACT CARRIER NOT A STAND ALONE CARRIER.

I believe, in this case, that "YOU'RE" (as a contraction for "YOU ARE" would be correct. YOUR would indicate something possessive, like YOUR GUPPY. Just trying to help.

 

[eaglesview]

They will fill the regional flying needs of whatever carrier swoops in to pick up the scraps if United fails. They have the ability to switch brand loyalties, you do not.

So UAL fails, you are there to fly your RJ for whoever picks up the scraps. Let me guess you get that flying by undercutting the next guy and continuing the race to the bottom. Good plan where do I sign up?