Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United To Open Joint SFO 737 Crew Base  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10311 times:

With growth of the 737 fleet at the new United, the company and ALPA have agreed to create a SFO 737 domicle.

What is interesting about this new fleet base is, the domicile will be available to both sUA and sCO pilot groups.

Initially a cadre of 81 crew members will be needed at the new base, with bids commencing by September and training running no later then November.

source: MEC notice


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1889 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9935 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It sounds like this is the first of the UA (combined) pilot bases. Its about time!

User currently offlineMX757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 628 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 9534 times:

The first sUA 737-900ER (A/C 0801) is scheduled for delivery Aug 1st.


Is it broke...? Yeah I'll fix it.
User currently offlineonebadlt123 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 9371 times:

Quoting MX757 (Reply 2):
The first sUA 737-900ER (A/C 0801) is scheduled for delivery Aug 1st.

And with nobody to fly it!


User currently offlineMX757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 628 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 9238 times:

Quoting Reply 3):
And with nobody to fly it!

They're qualified. Our last 2 deliveries from Boeing were flown in by sUA pilots.



Is it broke...? Yeah I'll fix it.
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5943 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 8965 times:

Quoting MX757 (Reply 4):
They're qualified. Our last 2 deliveries from Boeing were flown in by sUA pilots.

So sUA do have 737 crew now? Do you which base?



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineonebadlt123 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 8468 times:

Quoting MX757 (Reply 4):
They're qualified. Our last 2 deliveries from Boeing were flown in by sUA pilots.

It's not the pilots that I am talking about. Those are part 91 flights. Who is going to dispatch these birds? sUA dispatchers are using Sabre to plan and release their flights and sabre isn't capable of planning 737's yet. sCO dispatchers use Phoenix/EDS and they can plan 737's however sUA pilots are not trained on sUA paperwork and acculaods. The biggest issue though is sCO and sUA dispatchers are still not under one JCBA so sCO dispatchers can not dispatch sUA metal yet and vise versa. It's a scope violation. There is nobody to dispatch these birds once they are on property and therefore they cannot fly revenue service until somebody can.

There is still a lot to be sorted out once these sUA 739's are all on board. It isn't as simple as plug and play. Lots and lots of scope issues need to be addressed before they are put them into service. Both pilot and dispatcher wise.

[Edited 2013-07-27 10:06:08]

User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 8331 times:

Quoting Reply 6):
sCO dispatchers use Phoenix/EDS and they can plan 737's however sUA pilots are not trained on sUA paperwork and acculaods.

S-UA pilots will get trained and operate under the S-CO dispatch and flight
Amnimg system per the agreement.


User currently offlineYXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1025 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7908 times:

What do you mean by the term "sUA" and "sCO"? For that matter the other terms like "PMUA" or "PMCO" etc.
Sorry if I sound stupid but I don't come from the aviation industry.



I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2366 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7856 times:

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 8):

sUA and sCO stand for subsidiary UA and CO, basically how the former UA and CO are referred to within the company. PMUA and PMCO stands for premerger UA and CO, when referring to the companies before they merged.


User currently offlineT5towbar From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7699 times:

We are still separate (sUA / sCO) till ALL JCBA's are done. Only the pilots have a joint agreement with the company. They just have to settle on a seniority list among themselves.


A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
User currently offlineonebadlt123 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7482 times:

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 8):
S-UA pilots will get trained and operate under the S-CO dispatch and flight
Amnimg system per the agreement.

Per what agreement? There is none under the sCO side dispatch wise. You can train all the pilots you want, make any agreement with ALPA and the pilot group but the main blocking point is a sCO dispatcher can NOT dispatch a sUA crew or aircraft until a JCBA is written. Only sUA and NONE of them are trained or able to use EDS/Phoenix and the sCO dispatcher can not train sUA dispatchers. There is no "agreement" here on sCO dispatch wise. Unless they get a JCBA, its not happening.


User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1624 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 7276 times:

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 8):
What do you mean by the term "sUA" and "sCO"? For that matter the other terms like "PMUA" or "PMCO" etc.

It's cool avgeek-speak intended to highlight the avgeek's special inside knowledge of the airline industry and differientiate the speaker from the unwashed masses (who it seems only fly economy .. oops I mean Y class).  

So, can PMUA (see?) fly the 737-900 once it arrives and where will it be based?


User currently offlineQANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1984 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7030 times:

What are sUA and sCO planes? PMUA and PMCO?


My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
User currently offlineT5towbar From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6900 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 13):
What are sUA and sCO planes? PMUA and PMCO?

For the sake of this conversation, all of the new deliveries of the 739 are supposed to be flown by sUA pilots, since they will be replacing the older 752's that sUA crews used to fly. The older a/c are supposed to be sold. sCO and sUA have 752's, but sUA birds are older and will be replaced (except for the P.S. configured aircraft and a few of the later builds) with the 739 (which was an original sCO order). Since sUA didn't have a 737 fleet (they were replaced by regional aircraft), sCO has a very large 737 fleet, and these a/c are replacements for the sUA birds.

I don't know the details about the dispatch situation, but I did read somewhere in company newsletter that flight ops would be going to the Sabre system for the whole fleet. We have two different systems as far as on the ground as well, and they want to consolidate it as well.

Quoting Reply 11):
Per what agreement? There is none under the sCO side dispatch wise. You can train all the pilots you want, make any agreement with ALPA and the pilot group but the main blocking point is a sCO dispatcher can NOT dispatch a sUA crew or aircraft until a JCBA is written. Only sUA and NONE of them are trained or able to use EDS/Phoenix and the sCO dispatcher can not train sUA dispatchers. There is no "agreement" here on sCO dispatch wise. Unless they get a JCBA, its not happening.

That hasn't stopped anything. Scope has been violated before during this merger with the 170's coming into EWR. So that is nothing new. This is going to happen like it or not. Hopefully the rest of us will get JCBA's done by years end.



A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6933 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6850 times:

Quoting T5towbar (Reply 14):
sCO and sUA have 752's, but sUA birds are older and will be replaced (except for the P.S. configured aircraft and a few of the later builds)

Not all are going. Check the "fleet status" thread and you'll note that quite a few sUA 757s are going in for interior MX. The odd thing is that quite a few that are being kept are on the older side (like 1990 builds.)

I hate to burst your bubble but there are many sCO 757s that are almost 20 years old as well.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6808 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 15):
Not all are going. Check the "fleet status" thread and you'll note that quite a few sUA 757s are going in for interior MX. The odd thing is that quite a few that are being kept are on the older side (like 1990 builds.)

All sUA 752s except those getting reconfigured to the PS 2 cabin will be gone by the end of 2015.



Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1889 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6793 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Its interesting that once again, UA is having merger issues by virtue of the fact they have UA 739ERs coming aboard and the sCO dispatchers aren't allowed under the contract to dispatch these a/c. I didn't realize it would be so monumentally difficult for UA that it would take over two years to amend the appropriate contracts and in the end, fail. It also sounds like in the same time period, they haven't managed to integrate the dispatch systems for these two airlines.

So the new 739ERs instead will be dispatched in violation of an old contract....well played  

I got a kick out of the canned speeches in the earnings report this week, with glowing reports from all concerned yet they still haven't completed the basics of the merger with sorting out the labor issues. That should've been done at the front end with serious talks starting days after that announcement in 2010.

[Edited 2013-07-27 14:42:35]

User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6933 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6764 times:

Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 16):

No, that is incorrect. They are not all going to be dumped by 2015.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6650 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 18):
No, that is incorrect. They are not all going to be dumped by 2015.

What's your source? Because my source is the company website.



Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6933 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6629 times:

Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 19):

Then why are they bringing certain 757 in for MX if they are going to dump them in 2 years? Seems like a waste of money.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently onlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6536 times:

Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 19):
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 18):
No, that is incorrect. They are not all going to be dumped by 2015.

What's your source? Because my source is the company website.
Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 19):
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 18):

I am not sure if they are all going to be gone by year end 2015 but the vast majority should be. If UA keeps taking delivery of the 737-900ERs at the same rate as they have (2 a month...and that rate looks fairly steady.) All of the domestic 752s should be gone by the middle of 2016. I would assume that the initial MAX's will replace the 15 PS birds...

[quote=tommy767,reply=20]Then why are they bringing certain 757 in for MX if they are going to dump them in 2 years? Seems like a waste of money.

They are not spending all that much money on the interiors...new seat covers and new carpets/galley flooring are rather cheap.

[Edited 2013-07-27 15:05:52]


Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6147 times:

Quoting Reply 11):
Per what agreement?

The S-UA pilots will be trained to use the S-CO flight plan, logbook and all the other S-CO differences until the harmonization of the 737. In fact the 737 fleet is getting shipsets to help ease the transition. You dispatch planes not pilots correct?

How do you dispatch a flight on the S-CO side now that has a furloughed S-UA pilot as as crew member? That happens hundreds of times each day. Those pilots are all qualed under S-CO procedures. What's the difference going forward?


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6112 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 17):
Its interesting that once again, UA is having merger issues by virtue of the fact they have UA 739ERs coming aboard and the sCO dispatchers aren't allowed under the contract to dispatch these a/c.

That is NOT the case. You can see above. The 739's will be dispatched using CO dispatchers and procedures for the time being. The S-UA pilots will operate under CO differences for now. Once SABRE flight plan and end state logbook procedures are in place on the 737 there will be no differences.

s-UA did not have a 737NG program. It makes cost sense to adopt the S-CO program. Why is that so difficult to understand? Cost are a concern in every merger item. Why waste money duplicating the S-CO program to only have joint programs after ISL in October?


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1889 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6030 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mcdu (Reply 23):
It makes cost sense to adopt the S-CO program. Why is that so difficult to understand?

I totally understand that point. The issue raised about was WHETHER the sCO dispatchers would dispatch a non sCO 739ER with a sUA crew. I don't work for UA. I do work with contracts in other industries and find the airline industry completely insane when it comes so some of the more "unique" lines in the sand. If in fact the dispatchers don't have an issue with these new a/c and crews then my point isn't relevant or valid.

I guess as an outsider, I don't understand why there hasn't been a full integration on the dispatch side. Is it the contract? If that is the case then we're sitting almost three yrs since the merger announcement with that not being completed. If its systems integration, same point.

I'm more familiar with the pilot contract issues given I grew up on the sCO side though I still am amazed that the pilot integration has taken so long. The hangup in integration has cost the stakeholders millions. I'm sure someone on this board has compared DL to UA in that regard and I doubt the end results would shed UA in a favorable light.

I know there are examples such as the debacle at US but there are only so many ways to integrate seniority. Its in everyone's best interest to hammer that out asap to allow cross fleeting and rightsizing the fleet and routes. It can't happen until the airline is able to open new bases, close others and/or shift a/c around. Duplicating bases for sUA and sCO (read the 777 for example) hamstrings the airline's flexibility and therefore, profits.

[Edited 2013-07-27 16:53:13]

User currently offlineonebadlt123 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6366 times:

Quoting mcdu (Reply 22):

How do you dispatch a flight on the S-CO side now that has a furloughed S-UA pilot as as crew member? That happens hundreds of times each day. Those pilots are all qualed under S-CO procedures. What's the difference going forward?

In short, they were called back to go on the sCO seniority list. That's why they can fly sCO planes.
I'm done arguing this until further details about a harmonized work group is finished. Until then, good luck seeing these birds dispatched under sCO.

[Edited 2013-07-27 17:38:33]

User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1889 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6315 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Reply 25):
I'm done arguing this until further details about our JCBA is finished. Until then, good luck seeing these birds dispatched under sCO.

Ok, they still don't have a contract and it sounds like there is a SCOPE issue thrown in . So apparently, management thinks it won't be an issue but the dispatchers of course will point to the contract.

That should be entertaining.


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 27, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6358 times:

Quoting Reply 25):
In short, they were called back to go on the sCO seniority list. That's why they can fly sCO planes.

You have zero ground to stand on. The joint seniority list will no linger designate L-CO pilots versus L-UA pilot. You dispatch planes NOT pilots. Not sure what you are going on about. Good luck getting that arguememt to stand up.


User currently offlineT5towbar From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 28, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6297 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 26):
Ok, they still don't have a contract and it sounds like there is a SCOPE issue thrown in . So apparently, management thinks it won't be an issue but the dispatchers of course will point to the contract.

That should be entertaining.

Till management stop slowwalking, this will continue.........

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 15):
Not all are going. Check the "fleet status" thread and you'll note that quite a few sUA 757s are going in for interior MX. The odd thing is that quite a few that are being kept are on the older side (like 1990 builds.)

I hate to burst your bubble but there are many sCO 757s that are almost 20 years old as well.

I didn't say all of them were going. Just the ones being replaced with the 739.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 24):
I'm more familiar with the pilot contract issues given I grew up on the sCO side though I still am amazed that the pilot integration has taken so long. The hangup in integration has cost the stakeholders millions. I'm sure someone on this board has compared DL to UA in that regard and I doubt the end results would shed UA in a favorable light.

Because the DL/NW merger was relatively a smooth one because DL management got both groups of their pilots together very quickly and made a deal. That's smart thinking. This merger is coming along, albeit slowly, but hopefully by end of year all groups will be full integrated; crews can be integrated; and all systems unified. That's the goal right now.



A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
User currently offlineonebadlt123 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6171 times:

Quoting mcdu (Reply 27):
You have zero ground to stand on. The joint seniority list will no linger designate L-CO pilots versus L-UA pilot. You dispatch planes NOT pilots. Not sure what you are going on about. Good luck getting that arguememt to stand up.

Who said anything about pilots? I dont know why you think I was saying we were bound by the pilot contract and their SLI. I know what my job entails, this 739 order we are discussing is a PMUA order therefore it falls under PMUA dispatchers so essentially you just proved my point. sCO can't take these planes from sUA dispatchers because its their work. Why do you think all premerger susidary aircraft are still dispatched by their original dispatchers? sUA does not dispatch 787's and sCO does not dispatch 747's. What so hard to understand? We don't touch their 777 and they don't touch ours? Same with the 757's and Airbusses. We don't cross train each others fleets at all and we operate two independent subsidiary specific flight planning systems. Until everything is on the same page contract wise we can not train sUA dispatchets on the flight planning system or 737.

Contrary to what you hear or think out there rumor wise, we are not in any shape or form one unified group in terms of labor. We are two independent work groups with our own work rules still. Any agreement with the pilot group out there is just that, am agreement with the pilot group and has no merit to which aircraft we dispatch. Until we become one unified group, we cannot take each others flights from each other. End of story


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 30, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6129 times:

Quoting Reply 29):
Until we become one unified group, we cannot take each others flights from each other. End of story

You guys work tail number specific? The new 739's are going into the combined fleet. Unless you has a pre merger transition agreement the company can dispatch the 739's under the CO dispatchers. Again it doesn'tatter to you guys who signs the pilot release portion as you alluded to earlier. The airplane are all going on the UA certificate.

I'm sure your lever will get you what you think you deserve........


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 31, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6132 times:

I think this dispatch argument needs to be taken aside, and not in this thread.

Feel free to start another one if you guys so desire, but frankly its much ado about nothing. The planes will come, and the planes will fly.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineQANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1984 posts, RR: 2
Reply 32, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5775 times:

Quoting T5towbar (Reply 14):

But what does sUA, sCO, PMUA, and PMCO mean or refer to?



My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5700 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 32):
But what does sUA, sCO, PMUA, and PMCO mean or refer to?

sCO = Subsidiary Continental
sUA = Subsidiary United
PMCO = Pre Merger Continental
PMUA - Pre Merger United



Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5943 posts, RR: 5
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5761 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 17):
I got a kick out of the canned speeches in the earnings report this week, with glowing reports from all concerned yet they still haven't completed the basics of the merger with sorting out the labor issues

To be fair, at Delta (the most wonderful merger ever, in any industry, if you believe some of the hyperbole on here) the Flight Attendants only started "Flying Together" last year. Until then it was still PMDL and PMNW as far as the FA groups were concerned.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 24):
Its in everyone's best interest to hammer that out asap to allow cross fleeting and rightsizing the fleet and routes. It can't happen until the airline is able to open new bases, close others and/or shift a/c around. Duplicating bases for sUA and sCO (read the 777 for example) hamstrings the airline's flexibility and therefore, profits.

I don't think that anyone can argue with that!

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 32):
But what does sUA, sCO, PMUA, and PMCO mean or refer to?

As said above sUA and PMUA = Subsidiary United and Pre-merger United, sCO and PMCO = Subsidiary Continental and Pre-merger Continental.

"PM" was used to differentiate the two work groups before the merger, and "s" after the merger (because UA and CO are subsidiaries of UCH)

Despite all the planes having the same name on the side and everyone using one Res system, United is still very much TWO airlines. At this stage it is still [old] United and Continental just flying under the same brand. That's why it is necessary to continually differentiate between the two component parts ... hence sUA and sCO.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1724 posts, RR: 2
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4724 times:

This labor harmonization sure take long time.

When can we expect to see fully single United Airlines, and not worry about it its a CO airplane and crew, and UA plane or crew?

[Edited 2013-08-11 14:30:23]

User currently offlineDualQual From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 793 posts, RR: 1
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4513 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 35):

A pilot seniority list is imminent. Then simply a question of company IT being ready to impliment the list. It would make sense to see the SFO 737 pilots flying together first. After that I would expect pilot mixing for non fenced stuff January 2014. As to the FAs, it's gonna be awhile. They still don't have a joint agreement. Following that will be an FA joint list.


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4019 times:

Quoting MX757 (Reply 4):
They're qualified. Our last 2 deliveries from Boeing were flown in by sUA pilots.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 18):
No, that is incorrect. They are not all going to be dumped by 2015.
Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 19):
What's your source? Because my source is the company website.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 20):
Then why are they bringing certain 757 in for MX if they are going to dump them in 2 years? Seems like a waste of money.

Tommy, UA is selling a 30 757s to FedEx. We have required maintenance we must perform before delivery in accordance with the terms of the sale. In addition to this, we are still reconfiguring several of the P.S. 757s.


User currently offlineoc2dc From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 410 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3724 times:

So, is this a fall of the Berlin Wall moment in UA's history or is it more like a President Bush landing on an aircraft carrier, announcing we won the war, when in reality the hard work was just beginning kind of moment?

Although I feel as though tensions have subsided slightly from last summer and the nonsense that was taking place then, UA has yet to become one with CO. How much longer is this going to take. I'm hoping the joint crew base is a step towards mending the pilots relationship and I hope it sets and example for flight attendants, dispatchers and others that are still crying about the merger.



I'm not complaining, I'm critiquing...
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1889 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting oc2dc (Reply 38):
So, is this a fall of the Berlin Wall moment in UA's history or is it more like a President Bush landing on an aircraft carrier, announcing we won the war, when in reality the hard work was just beginning kind of moment?

Although I feel as though tensions have subsided slightly from last summer and the nonsense that was taking place then, UA has yet to become one with CO. How much longer is this going to take. I'm hoping the joint crew base is a step towards mending the pilots relationship and I hope it sets and example for flight attendants, dispatchers and others that are still crying about the merger.

The following needs to happen to get this mess behind UA:

1) Complete seniority integration for the pilots and open up bids for pilots to shift to new bases and move to different a/c types;

2) Complete joint contract and integration with dispatchers, flight attendants, mechanics and customer service agents etc if not already done.

Cross train each group as needed to ensure maximum productivity and flexibility in scheduling (i.e. train sUA F/As on the 737 series, sCO F/As on the Airbus a/c and so on). This cross training can't happen until the contract and seniority integration is finished.

UA wants to move a/c throughout their system to right size a/c on given routes. They are starting to do that but I think it's more complex than needed because they are still operating as two seperate airlines in many ways. For example, there might be 777 routes better suited to two class service than three from traditional sUA bases. Perhaps there is sufficient demand to base three class a/c at traditional sCO bases etc.

Its a complex task to integrate two airlines into one. Until AA/US merge, it is the largest airline in the world and there tons of things which must be completed for the airline to be "one." It's surprising how different UA's approach was to DL's but some day, it will finally be done.


User currently offlinehereandthere41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3109 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 39):

That's not true about flight attendant cross training being dependent on joint contract and seniority integration. During this entire training year, sCO flight attendants have been receiving Airbus training on day 2 of their annual Continuing Qualification and sUA flights are being trained on the 737s. The sCO flight attendants will probably NOT receive 747 training anytime soon since that entire fleet is based out of SFO now (with the exception of LAX-SYD) and there is "metal protection" language until a JBA is reached. Their (sCO) subsidiary bases in SFO, ORD, LAX, IAD and DEN are domestic ONLY bases. 2014 or 2015 should see sUA flight attendants receiving 788 training. PM-UAs 788s are due to start arriving in 2016.


User currently offline777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 549 posts, RR: 2
Reply 41, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2988 times:

Most of the sCO pilots with a seniority of 2012(ish) are from UA. But, technically it doesn't matter. Somehow we're on the "papa" employee numbers....

User currently offlinequiet1 From Thailand, joined Apr 2010, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2646 times:

If the pilots totally integrate (contract and seniority) will they be able to cross-fly each others' fleet even before the F/As attain integration? i.e. Can an integrated pilot crew fly with sUA cabin crew one leg and sCO crew the next?

Or, is there something in the contracts (either pilot, or sCO F/A or sUA F/A) or policy that would keep the crews separate until both groups are integrated?


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 43, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2622 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 42):
If the pilots totally integrate (contract and seniority) will they be able to cross-fly each others' fleet even before the F/As attain integration? i.e. Can an integrated pilot crew fly with sUA cabin crew one leg and sCO crew the next?

Yes.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Vueling To Open Routes From SVQ (new Base?) posted Wed Jun 20 2007 22:03:43 by Joost
United To Open Up Job Centers posted Fri Mar 14 2003 00:10:55 by Speedport
More Sad United News...Bye Bye 747 HNL Crew Base posted Fri Oct 5 2001 02:05:09 by SFOintern
United Swaps SEA-NRT To 787; Rumor Close Crew Base posted Sat Jul 13 2013 11:07:53 by LAXintl
Zoom ''UK'' To Open Crew-base At LGW posted Sun Dec 24 2006 17:29:19 by FCAFLYBOY
CX Will Open Crew Base At SFO posted Sat Aug 5 2006 20:08:35 by Legacyins
Qantas To Open London Crew Base From June 2005 posted Tue Jun 22 2004 07:19:49 by ClassicLover
Norwegian To Open US Base In October posted Fri Jul 5 2013 23:15:11 by Mortyman
Eastern Airways To Close SOU/BRS Crew Base posted Wed Apr 10 2013 14:19:22 by european742
United To Move Express Flights To Terminal 1 @ SFO posted Thu Aug 30 2012 22:01:53 by ramprat74