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

[eaglesview]

It's been this way for over 2 years....I'm sure most of the United commuters know what priority they have been getting on the jumpseat....

Actually as a commuter I had no idea. I commute from a city that has a mix of mainline and RJ. That being said I would not think for a moment I should have priority over a guy that works for that airline. In my case Skywest or (might) Go Jet.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Actually as a commuter I had no idea. I commute from a city that has a mix of mainline and RJ. That being said I would not think for a moment I should have priority over a guy that works for that airline. In my case Skywest or (might) Go Jet.

So if these guys had just informed the United jumpseaters that this was happening.....Do you honestly think the United line pilots would have forced the UAL MEC to change their behavior....Be honest now.....

 

[eaglesview]

So if these guys had just informed the United jumpseaters that this was happening.....Do you honestly think the United line pilots would have forced the UAL MEC to change their behavior....Be honest now.....

Here is my honest answer. Having been bumped off many a jumpseat I would first question the accuracy of the letter. After being convinced it is accurate I would then assume it is yet another typical UAL scumbag management ploy to drive yet another wedge between work groups. They would like nothing better than have this flair up. In the end calling the jumpseat coordinator would be a consideration. Calling the MEC would not as there is simply to much other crap going on.

 

[rumrunner300]

Right on brother!!

and one of these days regional pilots will grow a set of balls and stand up for what is right.

THE RETURN OF ALL TURBOJET POWERED AIRCRAFT TO MAINLINE.

REGIONAL = TURBOPROP

If you get off a UAX flight, you should be greated with the smell of clover and cow sh!t. Ah, memories.

 

[Marko Ramius]

The claims you guys are making, don't even fit the letter you've put out. The letter claims it's a UAL management and software problem due to lack of revenue generation-not surprising since that was the reason given for reinstating pass charges a few years back. If it's a MEC problem and you're handing out these 'informative' letters to pilots shouldn't you state that? Seems more likely that you're having as much trouble with UA management as every employee group has had for the last 30 years or so you're moving on to what you feel is a softer target to get what you want. It's kind of like you took a course in airline management 101. I think you're gonna need more than flightinfo innuendo to prove it's a MEC problem.

 

[Poahi]

I can tell you this with absolute clarity. No ALPA carrier is part of this UAX group. ALPA's policy on jumpseat wars couldn't be clearer. The jumpseat is not to be used as a tool, weapon or instrument of a pilot group's objectives. Period.

 

[rtmcfi]

I can tell you this with absolute clarity. No ALPA carrier is part of this UAX group. ALPA's policy on jumpseat wars couldn't be clearer. The jumpseat is not to be used as a tool, weapon or instrument of a pilot group's objectives. Period.

Which union represents Mesa?

 

[Sonny Crockett]

Just found out from a friend on the UAL-MEC that this letter is AUTHENTIC!

 

[JoeMerchant]

Just found out from a friend on the UAL-MEC that this letter is AUTHENTIC!

....and what did your friend say about the issue?

 

[PCL_128]

I can tell you this with absolute clarity. No ALPA carrier is part of this UAX group.

It would appear that MAG ALPA signed it. Is that not a legitimate signature?

 

[Poahi]

It would appear that MAG ALPA signed it. Is that not a legitimate signature?

I'll let the MEC speak for itself, but I've been told by the powers that be that MAG is not part of this.

 

[btrthn5n5]

No they didn't. They have yet to appeal to the rank and file UAL pilots. Their efforts have apparently failed with the UAL MEC, so it's time to try working with the rank and file. If that fails, then alternative measures may be justified. But jumping straight to threats is inappropriate and counterproductive.

I thought that MECs represented the "rank and file" pilots. Isn't that the point of them even existing? What is the point of having unions at all if efforts can fail with them and have to be taken to the "rank and file"? What the heck are we paying for?

 

[PCL_128]

I thought that MECs represented the "rank and file" pilots.

Theoretically, yes. In practice, it doesn't always work that way.

 

[Checknsix]

This problem has been going on for some time now. I was the victim of it a couple of times. There is one clown at mainline, in their MEC, that has really been pushing for the UAL guys to have priority on all the express carriers. There have been multiple phone calls to my past CP on this....trying to get us to agree to letting mainline guys having first priority, and he basically told them to go F-off. I had this discussion with the CP personally. I wasn't proud of him very many times....but this was certainly one of them.

When I say I was the victim of the problem, I generally fixed it by talking to the captain of the flight, or by talking to dispatch. I had a gate agent do this to one of our jumpseating FO's one morning and I was captain. She was going to put the mainline guy on the only available seat...the jumpseat. I told her that our FO had priority...no question. Then the gate agent tried to tell me that since the jumping FO didn't have on their uniform, she couldn't go...of course, not our policy. I simply told the gate agent that the plane was going nowhere until the problem was resolved, and that I was calling my dispatch to explain why the plane was going to be late. Argument over! I won in two seconds flat.

 

[dispatchguy]

The Letter

From a few other places I hit...

June 30, 2008



TO: United Air Lines Pilot Association MEC
FROM: United Express Carriers Pilots Associations
RE: Jumpseat Impasse


In 2005, United Airlines management and pilots reached a welcomed agreement under which “offline” pilots were granted unlimited jumpseat privileges. To implement this change, United Airlines (UAL) added a new Boarding Priority system [BP-11] to the already existing priority sorting software. However, it soon became apparent that the BP-11 sorting program had a critical flaw, one which UAL now appears unwilling to fix.

It is important that the scope of this problem be understood. Prior to the 2005 software change, UAL limited the number of jumpseats available on each flight to the actual number of jumpseats in the cockpit. However, once offline pilots were granted unlimited jumpseat privileges, a new computer software system was needed in order to sort jumpseat requests. That new computer system was BP-11.

BP-11 works properly for all pilots on UA mainline flights, only. On UAL flights, BP-11 properly gives UAL pilot jumpseat requests priority, and the system sorts United Airline pilots’ requests on the basis of seniority. United Airline Express [UAX] pilots are then given next priority, with the system sorting UAX requests in order of the UAX pilots’ check-in time. All other carriers’ pilots are then sorted next, also in order of those pilots’ check-in time. However, the BP-11 sorting system does not work for any pilots on express carriers. On express carriers, the BP-11 system continues to sort jumpseat requests as if the flight was an UAL mainlineflight. Under the current system, BP-11 not only gives UAL pilots jumpseat priority over express carrier pilots, on express carrier flights, but the BP-11 system also fails to honor the express carriers’ rules of seniority on express carrier flights. This was (and still is) an untenable situation.

In an effort to address these concerns, a “work-around” was implemented by all UAX carriers. Express carrier pilots who wanted to “jumpseat” onboard any UAX flight agreed to list themselves as “non-revenue” passengers. The pilots would then tell the Customer Service Representative (CSR) that they would be willing to sit in the cockpit jumpseat, if needed, in order to ensure making the flight (the CSR would






simply add “Jump Seat Authorized” next to the pilots’ names.) This “solution” around the BP-11 system flaw worked until the Fall of 2007.

In the Fall of 2007, UAL implemented another software change that negatively and financially impacted UAX pilots. Now, while coach seats remained free of charge to “jumpseating” pilots, all upgraded seat assignments would now cost “jumpseating” UAX pilots a fee. This fee applies to all UAX pilots on any upgraded seat, no matter whether that seat is on a UAL mainline or express carrier flight. As a result, the BP-11 “work-around” that was being used to maintain and honor the jumpseat rules and seniority preferences is now costing UAX pilots money. And, if a UAX pilot tries to avoid the upgrade fee (say, for example, by asking the CSR for an “Offline Member of the Crew” card to be issued), that pilot is now subject to the improper sorting problems still inherent in the BP-11 system. UAX pilots, therefore, are again faced with an untenable situation.

In an effort to address jumpseat issues and concerns, UALPA attempted to bring together representatives from both UAL and UAX in a series of “Jumpseat Process Improvement Team” meetings (JPIT). For the past nine (9) months, UAX representatives have repeatedly explained to UAL the jumpseating problems continuing to face all UAX pilots. Finally, in May, 2008, UAL told the UAX carriers that UAL was unwilling to invest any money to fix the ongoing sorting problems with the BP-11 system, since that investment would not generate any revenue for UAL.

UAX carriers believe that UAL’s unwillingness to address the inequities in the current jumpseating software, and UAL’s stated reason of lack of revenue generation, is belied by UAL’s recent investment in non-revenue generating software upgrades. For example, in April, 2008, UAL pilots successfully petitioned UAL to change the “K-Priorities” on all UAL and UAX flights. As of May, 2008, all UAX carriers are now divided into two separate jumpseating categories, “K-1” and “K-2.” UAX carriers (and their pilots) that agree to give UAL pilots a higher jumpseat priority on that carrier’s flight are now assigned the higher and preferred “K-1” designation when that carrier’s pilots turn around and attempt to jumpseat onboard any UAL or UAX flight. Those UAX carriers who refuse to give UAL pilots a higher jumpseating priority on UAX flights are then assigned the lower “K-2” priority when those UAX pilots turn around and attempt to jumpseat on any UAL or UAX flight. (Therefore, pilots from Go Jets and Trans States Airlines now have “K-1” jumpseat priority throughout the UAL and UAX system, while pilots from SkyWest Airlines, Chautauqua, Republic Airlines and Shuttle America have been lowered to a “K-2” jumpseat priority.) During this same time period, yet another software change was implemented by UAL. Now, pilots of Mesa Airlines and Colgan Airlines have been dropped to an “L” jumpseat priority system, which is even lower than the “K-1” and “K-2” jumpseat priorities. Not only has UAL been willing to spend money on this new priority system, but this new system (which is simply a software subset of the already flawed BP-11 computer sorting system) creates yet another wholly untenable situation: Go Jet, Trans States and UAL pilots now have higher jumpseat priority than SkyWest, Chautauqua, Republic and Shuttle America pilots on their own flights. And, all UAL and UAX pilots have higher jumpseat priority than Mesa and Colgan pilots on their own flights.

To say that the “respective agreement tables” or the “captain’s jumpseat authority” has not been changed misses these points entirely. Jumpseat requests are made by the pilots at the gate, and therefore, it is the CSRs who process all jumpseat requests. The CSRs, in turn, rely upon the computer software to sort priorities and make jumpseat assignments. Because the BP-11 computer software used by the CSRs is inherently flawed (with respect to all UAX carriers), it is the BP-11 software that must be fixed.

THEREFORE, all of the Pilot Associations flying for United Airlines as United Airline Express carriers now formally request that the software be changed to recognize our respective flight numbers and sort jumpseat requests in accordance with our respective seniority and priority agreements. Recently, on behalf of UALPA, UAL has repeatedly demonstrated that rapid software changes can be made, even when those changes did not generate any revenue and adversely impacted all of the pilots flying for UAX carriers. Now, the pilots flying for the UAX carriers respectfully request that UALPA seek to rectify this situation. The UAX pilots believe that thirty (30) days is a reasonable amount of time for UALPA and UAL to fix the unpalatable and unworkable BP-11 jumpseat sorting system. Unfortunately and regrettably, if UALPA will not honor the UAX pilots’ request, then the UAX pilots will have no other choice but to deny all United Airline pilots any available jumpseat, regardless of aircraft colors. And, while we realize that this is a drastic measure, it must be understood that the degradation of our jumpseats on our own aircraft must be changed. For, although it is not our intention to create animosity between our respective pilot groups, the UAX pilots’ concerns have simply been overlooked and disrespected for too long. Ultimately, we seek nothing more than to honor the jumpseat seniority, priority and dignity for ALL of our respective pilot groups.





Any questions or comments should be directed to the UAX Jumpseat Committees by way of the UALPA Jumpseat Committee. We look forward
to your timely response, and hope that these issues can be resolved in an amicable and professional manner.

Signed,

The Pilots of Colgan Air
GoJet MEC/Jumpseat Committee
MAG MEC/Jumpseat Committee
Republic Airways Holdings (representing Chautauqua Airlines and Shuttle America) Pilot Group Executive Council
SAPA Executive Board/Jumpseat Committee

 

[METARzan]

A few thoughts from another SKYW pilot.

When I was a newhire, a UAL pilot gave up the jumpseat on a UAL plane to little old newhire me so I could get to work and not miss my show (he was heading home and could catch the next one). I was impressed with his professional courtesy and genuine care for others. Then I was almost blown away when I found out that he was about to get furloughed in two weeks and I was on my way to go fly UAX flying. (man did I ever feel small)

The rest of my short career I have been looking for an oportunity to pay back another UAL pilot like that.

I want to welcome all UAL (and all other airlines for that matter) into my jumpseat, any time I can.


The situation that is going on right now with Jumpseat priority at UAL did not happen over night. SkyWest flights are now continually leaving the gate with a SkyWest jumpseater at the gate because the UAL agent sent down another carrier's pilot because the computer told them to. I think we can all agree that this is not right and it should be corrected.


The SKW jumpseat chair has been working tirelessly for months to rectify the problem with UAL and the United MEC to no avail. The decision to send out the letter was not taken lightly and it was not made alone.


I have no desire to "threaten" any pilot with a jumpseat war, but I will enlist every UAL pilot I come across to encourage UAL and their MEC to live up to the agreements that they have made.

Respectfully, Just another SkyWest Pilot

(P.S. I like the UAL pilots so much, I married one of their daughters.)

 

[JoeMerchant]

Now we know why the Trans States MEC didn't sign the letter....They have priority too.....They don't see the problem either....

GoJet has priority too, but they signed the letter to fix it....

 

[~~~^~~~]

Funny to read Joe Merchant and PCL 128 fight about a jumpseat skirmish when PCL has no express carriers and the airlines are Joe's competitors.

Captains should be checking the gate house, observing who needs a ride and making it happen. We had our little J/S battles and when I had the fourth stripe - I got folks on MY jumpseat. (moved lots of bags, filed higher altitudes, even took a few 135 guys in back).

If our employers are this big on outsourcing, displacements and other disruptions to destroy our longevity then we need to make positive space to work a priority, just like the factionals have. Sure it messes up crew rest and costs money, but that is just the price of doing business. Use some of that money saved by replacing a DC9 with an RJ.

Again, it is a cost of doing business. Try the J/S, if taken, give me a pass to work.

 

[Mr.B]

Just found out from a friend on the UAL-MEC that this letter is AUTHENTIC!

Fine. My answer is "No". Its easy. Let them get to work/parties on their RJs.

 

[imacdog]

Fine. My answer is "No". Its easy. Let them get to work/parties on their RJs.

Can a little copilot make that decision?