to the cal guys-just make 70 seaters pure united?

[Da Vinci]

what's to stop lorenzo from just selling the seats as pure united? Isn't that the next most logical step for him? I guess i'm getting ahead of myself, I hope alpa puts out a faq that covers all these issues-including what can be done about the skywest pilots lining up to fly 737 routes with their little jet.

United said in an e-mailed statement that it disagrees with the arbitrator's decision, but will comply with the ruling.
"We are pleased that this decision will permit the company to redeploy 70-seat aircraft in certain markets under the United Express brand to better meet demand and improve profitability of the combined company," the company said.


whole article here
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BU2B220101231

 

[General Lee]

what's to stop lorenzo from just selling the seats as pure united? Isn't that the next most logical step for him? I guess i'm getting ahead of myself, I hope alpa puts out a faq that covers all these issues-including what can be done about the skywest pilots lining up to fly 737 routes with their little jet.

United said in an e-mailed statement that it disagrees with the arbitrator's decision, but will comply with the ruling.
"We are pleased that this decision will permit the company to redeploy 70-seat aircraft in certain markets under the United Express brand to better meet demand and improve profitability of the combined company," the company said.


whole article here
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BU2B220101231

Why didn't they do that in the first place? Doesn't that management team think of consequences before they decide to do something? It's gonna get even nastier before it gets any better over there.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Shrek]

It was a way of gauging how unified the pilot group is currently. Also it was meant to stir the pot a little as well.......Mission Accomplished Mr. Smilton you got us more unified than ever - your move

 

[johnsonrod]

Someone just stated United itself might already be very close to their own 70 seat limit, so that is why they tried to put them on the CAL side. Now, they might be in a bind. I don't know if that is true or not.

 

[Shrek]

Someone just stated United itself might already be very close to their own 70 seat limit, so that is why they tried to put them on the CAL side. Now, they might be in a bind. I don't know if that is true or not.

True statement......

 

[pilotgolfer]

Someone just stated United itself might already be very close to their own 70 seat limit, so that is why they tried to put them on the CAL side. Now, they might be in a bind. I don't know if that is true or not.

If they need a place to put them...I'm all for Smisek sticking them up his arse.

 

[ATA For Now!]

if they need a place to put them...i'm all for smisek sticking them up his arse.

+1!!!

 

[densoo]

"DALLAS (AP) — In a victory for Continental Airlines pilots,"....

That's all most people will read, and that alone was worth the fight. It will appear in hundreds of newspapers across the country.

-- It negates some small amount of advertising dollars where they try to paint the company in a positive light.

--It gets the board of directors' attention for the CEO ("I thought you said labor wasn't going to be a problem?").

-- It doesn't allow them to expand RJ flying beyond UAL's current limit nor code the flights as CO, costing them some revenue (it must, otherwise they wouldn't have fought over it).

Put together, it will incrementally improve the pilots' negotiating position. It may be a small increment, but it is something at least. More battles and more wins like this will result in a much better contract.

 

[Skippy]

This move did many things for mgmt

1. Set a precedent that just bc 2 airlines merge, both contracts are in force until a jcba is reached- meanin cant throw away cal scope and use ual scope before the jcba- nice try smisek
2. I think shrek is right ualex is nearing their max but i think mgmnt was just takng a 1% chance that they might win- the risk wqs low butthe reward wouldve been huge!

3. I also think it has connecting plane/ airline implications as well
4. Creating confusion ( smoke and mirror games just like the ol' trans states)mgives them even more jcba delay time. Just like buying compass gave tsa more contract neg time-

5. The next two years will be very interesting
New ftdt rules, possible icba by end of2011,
Pilots getting their last surgery before retirement and using their bajillion sick hours, lots of training to ramp up for...
Cant wait

 

[Scapegoat]

Listen up, If you think that managment hasnt thought of all this before then your crazy. The "If this, then this.." routine played out months ago in a chicago office. Try to get what you want until someone tells you you cant. Now they will just shift it to pure UAX flights but still carry most of the original pax anyway.
I agree that its a great interim victory for continental pilots but the profit margin on regional flying is too great to be ignored. (Ignored by management anyway.) They will get what they want in the long run. And all those potential jobs at Majors will go unfilled because they (major airlines management) continue to use regional airlines to provide more and more feed to their destinations.
Rememeber, most of those 'reginal pukes' at express jet/ skywest/ republic would all be employed at united, continental and delta if they ever decided to do their own flying. But that wont ever happen.

 

[jtf]

So if it is pure UAX, is a code share allowed? That is what I saw in other threads that may block that. They could do it as UAX, but then the pax don't get to just change airplanes at the Continental hub onto a Continental flight without buying separate tickets for each leg. I'm not sure if that is correct- just what I read elsewhere. Anyone have any facts that either back or smack down the conjecture I've heard- just curious? I hope this is true and heads off the end-around.

 

[jonjuan]

So if it is pure UAX, is a code share allowed? That is what I saw in other threads that may block that. They could do it as UAX, but then the pax don't get to just change airplanes at the Continental hub onto a Continental flight without buying separate tickets for each leg. I'm not sure if that is correct- just what I read elsewhere. Anyone have any facts that either back or smack down the conjecture I've heard- just curious? I hope this is true and heads off the end-around.

They could get around the code change in IAH by using an interline agreement. No different than if a pax books a ticket on Travelocity and uses 2 different airlines. It's pretty standard and allows for the seamless transfer of bags and ticketing.

 

[bluefin]

Management is against 2 contracts now. They cant fly 70's on CO routes and they are maxed out on allowable uax flying on UAL's contract. They jsut lost one battle do you think they are going to give up that easy? Maybe now they realize the uniaon is not going to give in. UAL stock will drop because of this and wall street aint gonna be happy!

 

[contrail67]

Someone just stated United itself might already be very close to their own 70 seat limit, so that is why they tried to put them on the CAL side. Now, they might be in a bind. I don't know if that is true or not.

Yep...and you can only squeeze a balloon so many ways before she pops.

SCOPE

 

[Hutchman]

Who says they are close to reaching the limit of 70 seaters at United? Last time I checked there is NO LIMIT on the number of 70 Seat Aircraft. The only limit is 50% of the block hours can be flown by express carriers(which they are nowhere near). It doesn't matter what aircraft is flown. Add a new international route and you can add several more 70 seaters. Take out a few turbo props, add a few 70 seaters.

What am I missing???????

Where are you guys getting your intel?

 

[atpcliff]

New ftdt rules, possible icba by end of2011,

The Flight/Duty/Rest rules are required by LAW (NOTHING to do with the FAA) to be IN FORCE before 1 Aug 2011. The chances of Congress gutting the new rules, associated with airline safety for passengers, is less than zero.

Two or more business aviation coalitions petitioned the FAA to expand the time for comments, to delay the rule changes, and the FAA said "NO" in each case.

cliff
GRB
PS-A post I read quite a while ago from a CAL pilot said that CAL mgmt had already programmed the increased number of pilots that CAL would need with the probable F/D/R rules in force...I think it was 7/8% or 15%...can't remember the exact %.

 

[bluefin]

Who says they are close to reaching the limit of 70 seaters at United? Last time I checked there is NO LIMIT on the number of 70 Seat Aircraft. The only limit is 50% of the block hours can be flown by express carriers(which they are nowhere near). It doesn't matter what aircraft is flown. Add a new international route and you can add several more 70 seaters. Take out a few turbo props, add a few 70 seaters.

What am I missing???????

Where are you guys getting your intel?

I think its up to 88 - 90%, from united, source: me, while watching my job go bye-bye!!! I think there has already been issues brought up, cause UAL wasn't counting props in the time and it has already exceeded 100%, but the mec only filed a grievence.

What are you missing, times are gonna change!!!!