UAL Pilots take Skywest and Mesa jobs

[fracflyer]

But what are the chances of a full recall at UAL in the next 2 years?

Somewhere less than zero

 

[GuppyPuppy]

What happens if UAL fails to recover and part of their ongoing restructoring means they cant pay for the different pay scale and training/retraining?

eek:

If UAL folds up or if ANY flying is lost at Mesa/SkyWest due to UAL, these guys should be the first to go back to the street.

I was furloughed in January from UA and currently working for a UAX carrier. Should I complain to UAL and ALPA to ask for back pay since I have been flying their passengers around on UAX RJ's already?

Many of those UAL pilots who will benefit from this program will not even touch a CRJ700. They will be flying the same trips that I do, but getting more money - thanks United.

I wonder if ALPA ever thought about those of us furloughees who are already flying UA passengers around on UAX RJ's. Probably not - thanks ALPA.

GP

 

[fracflyer]

If UAL folds up or if ANY flying is lost at Mesa/SkyWest due to UAL, these guys should be the first to go back to the street.

I was furloughed in January from UA and currently working for a UAX carrier. Should I complain to UAL and ALPA to ask for back pay since I have been flying their passengers around on UAX RJ's already?

Many of those UAL pilots who will benefit from this program will not even touch a CRJ700. They will be flying the same trips that I do, but getting more money - thanks United.

I wonder if ALPA ever thought about those of us furloughees who are already flying UA passengers around on UAX RJ's. Probably not - thanks ALPA.

GP

1. They'll be at the bottom of the senority list, why wouldn't they be the first to go?

2. By the time this gets up and running you'll probably be at or close to second year pay.

3. I was furlouged almost two years ago, and I know this will never help me, but I'm glad someone might benifit. It doesn't hurt anybody.

Peace

 

[Carl_Everett]

I believe you're using the logic, "Someone is getting something I'm not. I must be geting screwed."

If I was still at UAL I would be happy that the furloughed pilots were getting a little something to help them and their families out. The expense is chump change, and I think ALPA did the pilots a good service by giving them this option. (they don't have to do it)

From a business point of view, I think the dividends in Pilot/management relations will be 10x the cost.

I am not using that logic at all.

What people need to realize is that this is not helping UAL pilots. It is not helping regional pilots. It is ruining the profession. This is driving pilot's pay down on both sides.

You said regional pilots didn't have the balls to vote down a concessionary T/A, that is why the pay is so bad there. What was the other option? Vote no and risk furlough, or worse liquidation. Are you happy that regional pilots are at least getting a little something to help them and thier families? I mean they aren't getting what what they deserve, but at least it is something.

You logic here will prevent any UAL furloughee from returning to UAL. Why should UAL grow mainline? They get great rates from the regionals. If they grow mainline, labor costs willl go up. If they grow Express, they can use the BAIN technique to drive Express labor cost down futher and make even more money for UAL. (Remember UAL now has the option to change the flying allocations after a set amount of time) If we keep going down that path, the logical progression will be that UAL will stop operating aircraft all together. They will farm out all flying and only sell tickets.

Back to you idea of my logic. Isn't that what every mainline pilot in the past 10 years has complained about. Regional pilots getting something that they are not getting. They must be getting screwed. [Read RJ's]

 

[Carl_Everett]

I don't think that UAL having to repay training contracts will be an issue. Which of the UA regionals have training contracts, and how long are they for?

In the unlikely situation where UAL recalled all of it's pilots before their training contracts were up, it would mean that UAL would be making money, and getting their pilots back to fly mainline A/C would outweigh the cost of repaying a training contract.

But what are the chances of a full recall at UAL in the next 2 years?

How much do you wanna bet that just before the 1st UAL pilot heads over to MESA, J.O. will make the training contract 7 years? I don't think the unions have any control over training contracts. Management has the option to change them at will.

 

[fracflyer]

I am not using that logic at all.

What people need to realize is that this is not helping UAL pilots. It is not helping regional pilots. It is ruining the profession. This is driving pilot's pay down on both sides.

You said regional pilots didn't have the balls to vote down a concessionary T/A, that is why the pay is so bad there. What was the other option? Vote no and risk furlough, or worse liquidation. Are you happy that regional pilots are at least getting a little something to help them and thier families? I mean they aren't getting what what they deserve, but at least it is something.

You logic here will prevent any UAL furloughee from returning to UAL. Why should UAL grow mainline? They get great rates from the regionals. If they grow mainline, labor costs willl go up. If they grow Express, they can use the BAIN technique to drive Express labor cost down futher and make even more money for UAL. (Remember UAL now has the option to change the flying allocations after a set amount of time) If we keep going down that path, the logical progression will be that UAL will stop operating aircraft all together. They will farm out all flying and only sell tickets.

Back to you idea of my logic. Isn't that what every mainline pilot in the past 20 years has complained about. Regional pilots getting something that they are not getting. They must be getting screwed. [Read RJ's]

I can't say I disagree with your arguments regarding the future of the industry, but that is an entirely different subject from the one at hand. A few UAL pilots going to Mesa or Skywest has nothing to do with this. Mesa or Skywest would hire pilots anyway. This is not going to influence the future of the profession.

Now, if you're saying that UAL ALPA should of never allowed reduction of the scope provisions to allow 70 RJ's in the first place, that's a different story. However, they're just following the example of the boys at DAL and AA that led the way.

On the RJ question, the difference is that the RJ's DID end up screwing the mainline guys. Not to blame the regional guys, but ALPA dropped the ball on the RJ issue.

In my opinion, for the last 10 years the mainline guys have tried to push down the regional guys. The regional guys have spent the time pushing back. In the end management will win and we'll only have ourselves to blame

Good luck

 

[Carl_Everett]

..snip..

A few UAL pilots going to Mesa or Skywest has nothing to do with this. Mesa or Skywest would hire pilots anyway. This is not going to influence the future of the profession.

..snip..

But UAL ALPA had to use negotiating capital to get this deal. How much of that pay cut do you think was from this deal? Did management want 1%-2% in pay cuts in exchange for this psuedo J4J deal? Maybe it was a work rule change. I bet they just didn't "give" it to the pilots for nothing, out of the goodness of their hearts. Whatever it was, it was too much. Like you said those furloughs could have went to MESA anyway. The UAL pilot group had to give something up for basically nothing.

UAL should be using ALL assets to help the bottom line of UAL. That is the only way UAL pilots will benefit.

 

[Dave Benjamin]

The roots of the problem go back to deregulation. If the majors hadn't shifted flying to lower cost regionals they would be out of business. It's that simple. Free markets and capitalism is what you're up against. U had the most restrictive scope and they were the first to fall. The reason pay is so low at the regionals is we have more applicants than postions. It gets further complicated when you throw in someone like Ornstein combined with a pilot group that failed to simply wait for the judge to render the single carrier ruling. Doh!

 

[fracflyer]

But UAL ALPA had to use negotiating capital to get this deal. How much of that pay cut do you think was from this deal? Did management want 1%-2% in pay cuts in exchange for this psuedo J4J deal? Maybe it was a work rule change. I bet they just didn't "give" it to the pilots for nothing, out of the goodness of their hearts. Whatever it was, it was too much. Like you said those furloughs could have went to MESA anyway. The UAL pilot group had to give something up for basically nothing.

UAL should be using ALL assets to help the bottom line of UAL. That is the only way UAL pilots will benefit.

Since this agreement was well after the new contract, I assume nothing was given up. The 70 seat jets were coming anyway. Probably done as a goodwill jesture for the pilots. God knows they need some goodwill at UAL.

 

[fracflyer]

The roots of the problem go back to deregulation. If the majors hadn't shifted flying to lower cost regionals they would be out of business. It's that simple. Free markets and capitalism is what you're up against. U had the most restrictive scope and they were the first to fall. The reason pay is so low at the regionals is we have more applicants than postions. It gets further complicated when you throw in someone like Ornstein combined with a pilot group that failed to simply wait for the judge to render the single carrier ruling. Doh!

I've got to disagree on a couple points:

1. If none of the majors had been allowed to shift flying to regionals then the playing field would of remained level and they would of had to complete against each other.


1.5 U had bigger problems than restrictive scope.

2. I believe in capitalism, but the entire reason unions exist is to control it. If pure capitalism was allowed to exist, then we'd all be making 25 cents/hr flying our 100 hours a month.

3. The reason pay is so low at the regionals is not because you have so many applicants. The majors had 10x the applicants when they were hiring. It's because people see the regionals a stepping stone. They're aprehensive to stick their necks out and stand up for better pay and working conditions, because they think the major job is right around the corner. (Of course the Comair guys do have brass ones with their 90 day strike) The key is organization and unity.

 

[MAK]

What people need to realize is that this is not helping UAL pilots. It is not helping regional pilots. It is ruining the profession. This is driving pilot's pay down on both sides.
[Read RJ's]

EXACTLY!!!!!

The larger the regionals get, the smaller the majors get, the less good jobs there are for EVERYBODY.

-MAK

 

[Dave Benjamin]

I've got to disagree on a couple points:

1. If none of the majors had been allowed to shift flying to regionals then the playing field would of remained level and they would of had to complete against each other.

2. I believe in capitalism, but the entire reason unions exist is to control it. If pure capitalism was allowed to exist, then we'd all be making 25 cents/hr flying our 100 hours a month.

Fracflyer,
I'd like to address your comments.
1. If no LCC's had come into existence then your assertion would be correct. However with LCC's in the picture not shifting flying to regionals would have spelled economic disaster even sooner. The majors may have been able to compete effectively in the long-haul international arena but the bread and butter domestic flying would have simply evaporated to a great extent. You can't sell a SFO-OAK seat in quantity for $1,000 when you competition offers it for $200.

2. I disagree with your definition of a union's role in "controlling capitalism." Unions cannot control an industry when some of the players are non-union. ALPA does not control how much a 737 captain at Southwest or what an A-320 captain at JBLU makes. Similarly they cannot control the work rules at Southwest or JBLU. Although Southwest is unionized their management enjoys a relatively good relationship with labor and SWAPA has wisely avoided killing the goose laying the golden eggs and further they have not alienated customers with labor actions.

 

[fracflyer]

Fracflyer,
I'd like to address your comments.
1. If no LCC's had come into existence then your assertion would be correct. However with LCC's in the picture not shifting flying to regionals would have spelled economic disaster even sooner. The majors may have been able to compete effectively in the long-haul international arena but the bread and butter domestic flying would have simply evaporated to a great extent. You can't sell a SFO-OAK seat in quantity for $1,000 when you competition offers it for $200.

2. I disagree with your definition of a union's role in "controlling capitalism." Unions cannot control an industry when some of the players are non-union. ALPA does not control how much a 737 captain at Southwest or what an A-320 captain at JBLU makes. Similarly they cannot control the work rules at Southwest or JBLU. Although Southwest is unionized their management enjoys a relatively good relationship with labor and SWAPA has wisely avoided killing the goose laying the golden eggs and further they have not alienated customers with labor actions.

1. As far as pilots are concerned, I think it would of been better if the majors had been forced to deal directly with SWA and JetBlue. Instead of farming flying out to regional carriers, they would of had to create a division to compete with them. At least the jobs would have stayed at the major and expanded the chances of everyone.

2. I disagree. ALPA does significantly influence the wages at SWA and JBLU. If SWA or JBLU wants to have happy pilot groups then they have to offer competitive compensation packages to keep their employees happy. Pilots in every type of aviation benefit from the years of union advances at the majors. I don't think corporate pilots would make what they do unless employers had to remain competitive with Airline wages. The regionals, for reasons I mentioned above, are the most notable exception.
Good luck

 

[AAflyer]

The regionals are for the time being. I wonder how quickly this will change as they become places that one may spend a majority of their careers. If they get those gains then there goes the original benefit of farming out that flying to cheaper paid labor.

So the big question is what will happen?

AA

To smart to guess, knowing how fluid and dynamic this industry is

 

[fracflyer]

The question should be, how (or when) can we make it happen?

 

[~~~^~~~]

EXACTLY!!!!!

The larger the regionals get, the smaller the majors get, the less good jobs there are for EVERYBODY.

-MAK

But you assume that "Regionals" have to be bad jobs. When I was a kid, Delta was a "Regional." Pan Am, Eastern, UAL and TWA were the big boys. But a Delta pilot on a 67 seat DC-9 did not have a "bad" job.

What has changed over the years is ALPA's negotiating pattern. Back in the good old days the union "jacked up the house" by lifting every corner to elevate the profession.

Now a days ALPA has slipped into letting a couple of MEC's run the entire union for the exclusive benefit of their members and the detriment of everyone else. The favored MEC's ascended to the current level of DAL. Now the house of cards is collapsing because the foundation is not firm. Two of the corners of the house of ALPA got jacked so high, that the house is falling in.

Why are "Regional" jobs bad? One reason is that the Delta MEC has proposed pay cuts for "all Delta employees" to offset the mainline pay cuts - so an ASA pilot at industry average wages is being asked by his own union (without his MEC's participation) to take a pay cut to supplement the income of a pilot at Delta making 47% more than the most highly paid pilot on the planet and 60% more than the industry average for the equipment.

Regional jobs don't have to stink - it is simply a result of the representation ALPA has provided. The union forgot about "restoring the industry," the union forgot we are all in this together.

~~~^~~~

 

[enigma]

I've got to disagree on a couple points:

1. If none of the majors had been allowed to shift flying to regionals then the playing field would of remained level and they would of had to complete against each other.

In your perfect world, just who would be in charge of controlling where the majors shifted their flying? How would you have denied new entry to the market? How would you have made them compete against each other?

2. I believe in capitalism, but the entire reason unions exist is to control it. If pure capitalism was allowed to exist, then we'd all be making 25 cents/hr flying our 100 hours a month.

So it would seem that you believe in "situational capitalism". You believe in it, but just not for your industry. That sort of sounds like the phrase I hear about taxes. "Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax the guy behind the tree".

Your conclusion about the result of pure capitalism only shows your lack of understanding of economics. A purely competitive marketplace will always reach a level of equilibrium. In our present system, beginners see the upper level of earnings paid out to international777 Captains and they decide to work for nothing in order to get to that level. As long as unions play favorites and prop up the wages for a select few, it basically guarantees that those at the bottom will continue to sacrific in order to be in a position that might allow them to one day gain the top level job. The problem is this, the low wages accepted by the bottom only drag down the numbers of people working at the top wages. If the true effect of accepting slave wages at the bottom were unveiled, it is almost a given that the downward pressure would be stopped because top level wages no longer exist across the board. However, since the union manages to protect the favored few, all of the entry level aspirants continue to see the illusive pot of gold at rainbows end and continue to work for nothing in an attempt to reach said pot.

So, I study the socio-economics of the situation and conclude that the problem we face is not entry level wannabees, nor top wage earning pilots, nor the free market. Our problem is a union structure that continues to ignore true market forces. If ALPA were to take on the characteristics of a benevolent dictatorship, we could all do well. As long as ALPA tries to maintain Mr. Worths wages and supress Mr. Commuter Pilots wages, we will continue to see wages and working conditions slide.

If ALPA were to allow market realities to set wages, and concentrate on what they really do best, like: working conditions, safety, legal help, etc,; we would all be making a decent wage and working in an acceptable environment. As long as DAL, etc has 777 Captains making a quarter of a mil, the aspirants will continue to work for nothing and drag the rest of us down.

3. The reason pay is so low at the regionals is not because you have so many applicants. The majors had 10x the applicants when they were hiring. It's because people see the regionals a stepping stone. They're aprehensive to stick their necks out and stand up for better pay and working conditions, because they think the major job is right around the corner. (Of course the Comair guys do have brass ones with their 90 day strike) The key is organization and unity.

Exactly. But point three is in conflict with points one and two. Which perspective do your really believe in?

regards,
enigma

 

[surplus1]

Re: UAL pilots keep jobs

While Jets for Jobs is far from a good deal for anyone concerned it is at least a step in the right direction.

A step in the right direction? For whom? Looks to me like you're playing the very "definition game" that you outlined, i.e., what is just and fair is based on how it affects you (or your peers).

The idea of preferential hiring at the bottom of the list is not bad. The idea that a newly hiried pilot should make more than a previously hired pilot at the same airline, for the same job, is a bad precedent for everyone, no matter who "pays for it". So much for the "UAL deal".

The USAirways deal is a different animal. Plain and simple it is the theft of seniority. It aslo forces the abrogation of labor contracts. It discriminates against some members of a labor union in favor of other members of the same labor union, both in different and separate bargaining units. That makes it violate the law and the unions DFR obligation. To say that that is a "step in the right direction" is ludicrous.

This isn't a question of perspective, it's a question of ethics and of law. Apparently neither ALPA or the mainline pilot groups can grasp this. Neither can the regional groups that "agreed" (coerced or not) to accept this garbage.

The labor union that invented "jets for jobs" should be sued out of existence and enjoined from implementing it. Too bad the abused don't seem to have the moxy to stand up for themselves.

 

[General Lee]

Surplus1,

What do you think about the USAir "Midatlantic" deal? I know it hasn't started yet, but they do have orders for the EMB-170's, and they should be on the way eventually. As I understand it, the Mid Atlantic deal provides 70 seaters for their own furloughs. I wish Delta would do that for theirs. That is the example I bring up to the Dalpa people and the management people in the ATL CPO. USAir actually might be trying to take care of their own. Sure, the pay rates have gone down tremendously, but I bet our furloughed pilots wouldn't mind the Comair contract, especially if their furlough might be an extended one.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Freight Dog]

Surplus, do you think J4J is radically different from staple? I was under the impression that the majority of CMR/ASA pilots would go for the staple...