UnitedTristar
Topic Author
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:25 am

OK any UA pilots out there want to shed some details on scope?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/united...mecs-send-tentative-031500642.html

-m

  
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:36 am

Lets hope they put this to bed and finish the merger. Hopefully this sets an example for the folks over at HP/US that this is it gets done.

Best of luck to the work group.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:27 am

Quoting UnitedTristar (Thread starter):
OK any UA pilots out there want to shed some details on scope?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/united...mecs-send-tentative-031500642.html

-m

I've received an email with some of the information and if I understand what I read, it's a MAJOR concession on Scope; up to 325 aircraft (includes the Q400s) with 76 seats in a couple of years.

It was my understanding that the mediator was pushing for "the Delta model," but this appears to be worse for the UA pilots and the pay is year behind Delta's, too.

At the moment, I'm waiting for a phone call from the email's sender to discuss if my understanding regarding Scope is correct.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
FriendlySkies
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:36 am

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 2):
I've received an email with some of the information and if I understand what I read, it's a MAJOR concession on Scope; up to 325 aircraft (includes the Q400s) with 76 seats in a couple of years.

Does that also include 50 seaters? As in up to 325 aircraft less than or equal to 76 seats? If so that's more or less status quo, and actually a reduction I believe.

I'm also curious if it's tied to any requirements for a % of total flights operated by mainline or something.

Either way, I hope this gets approved so they can really start to integrate the two carriers. If they can get a JCBA done quickly with the FA's then I think we'll start to see a lot more fleet integration around the hubs and some shifts on overseas flights (2 vs 3 class, etc).
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:43 am

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 3):
Does that also include 50 seaters? As in up to 325 aircraft less than or equal to 76 seats? If so that's more or less status quo, and actually a reduction I believe.

I've only read the material once, but it appeared to me that it was up to 325 aircraft (jet or prop) with 70-76 seats PLUS others (50 seat RJs, 37 seat props). I'll read it again in a bit.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
FL787
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:18 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:00 am

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 2):
I've received an email with some of the information and if I understand what I read, it's a MAJOR concession on Scope; up to 325 aircraft (includes the Q400s) with 76 seats in a couple of years.

It was my understanding that the mediator was pushing for "the Delta model," but this appears to be worse for the UA pilots and the pay is year behind Delta's, too.

Scope wise, 325 70-76 seaters is actually exactly the same as DL's new contract. Of course in the case of DL, they are adding 717s and parking CR2s in exchange so I would think UA pilots should receive some sort of incentive as well.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 4536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:04 am

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 3):

Does that also include 50 seaters? As in up to 325 aircraft less than or equal to 76 seats? If so that's more or less status quo, and actually a reduction I believe.

Normally that number would be 325 big RJs (so 70/76 seaters)

putting a hard cap on 50 seaters these days is worthless. That model is taking it self out of the market.

Quoting FL787 (Reply 5):
they are adding 717s

Truly hope that if UAL offers a carrot like the 717 their membership isn't stupid enough to bite.
New airliners.net web site sucks.
 
saab2000
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:19 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:53 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 6):
putting a hard cap on 50 seaters these days is worthless. That model is taking it self out of the market.

Contractually defining something is never worthless to either side. It clears up a gray area. The 50-seat market is dead now but it doesn't need to be forever. The 50-seaters that are around now are old tech, especially the CRJs. They are basically mid-80s technology with mid-80s costs. Leave a gap there worth unlimited 50-seaters (or whatever else) and don't think it won't be exploited by one side or the other. Clearly defined contracts are better than vague ones.
smrtrthnu
 
neveragain
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:59 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:00 pm

Does anyone know the timeline for the vote?
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 2731
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:07 pm

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 3):
If so that's more or less status quo, and actually a reduction I believe.

UAX (combined) is over 600 aircraft currently, with about 180ish 70-76 seaters (once YX is ramped up with all their Q's). I would imagine that the increase in large RJ's would be at minimum 1-1 with removals of smaller jets, or probably more. My question is, where do they source another 180 large RJs?

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 6):
Truly hope that if UAL offers a carrot like the 717 their membership isn't stupid enough to bite.

Not sure if you saw the UCH Q3 earnings release, but from the release:

"The company recorded $454 million of expense in the third quarter associated with lump sum cash payments that would be made in conjunction with the ratification of the contract and the completion of the integrated pilot seniority list."

Divide that by the 9,796 pilots listed as employed on United.com and you get a little over 46k per pilot. Is that enough of a carrot? (Yes, it's less if you include those still on furlough)



[Edited 2012-11-13 07:08:05]

[Edited 2012-11-13 07:10:33]
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:05 pm

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 9):
Not sure if you saw the UCH Q3 earnings release, but from the release:

"The company recorded $454 million of expense in the third quarter associated with lump sum cash payments that would be made in conjunction with the ratification of the contract and the completion of the integrated pilot seniority list."

It's my understanding that $400 million is for "retro pay" - the money not paid by UA and CO for operations past the the amendable dates of the two contracts. The remaining value is for changes to the disability plan.

By many estimates, the $400 million is about a BILLION short of the difference between the new pay rates and the old (end of contract) ones. In other words, the retro pay is paying about 28 cents on the dollar (owed).

UA pilots are nearly 3 years past the "amendable" date of their contract, CO pilots are nearly 4 years past the end of theirs.

From the perspective on this former line pilot, the details that I have seen fall well short of the "Delta model" the NMB Mediator has reportedly been espousing.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 2731
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:18 pm

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 10):
"retro pay"
Quoting flyhossd (Reply 10):
(owed).

They are not "owed" anything. The pilots union is equally responsible as is management to not getting an agreement done earlier. We can call it back pay, but it's really a bribe to take push through a new contract, it's hard to walk away when someone dangles stacks of cash like that in front of your face.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 10):
By many estimates,

By many Union centric estimates (Fixed it for you)  

[Edited 2012-11-13 08:19:13]
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:44 pm

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 11):
They are not "owed" anything. The pilots union is equally responsible as is management to not getting an agreement done earlier. We can call it back pay, but it's really a bribe to take push through a new contract, it's hard to walk away when someone dangles stacks of cash like that in front of your face.

You just illustrated why the pilots want "retro pay." That is, if the company doesn't pay the difference between the new and old rates, then the company is encouraged to drag out the negotiations.

So, if the company agrees to the new rates, the difference is indeed, "owed."
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 2731
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:13 pm

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 12):
So, if the company agrees to the new rates, the difference is indeed, "owed."

But the pilots also drag them out when they perceive a disadvantage as well, aka when all their peer groups are allowing more large RJ's and they feel threatened. Perceived job security vs. Dollar Pay, it's an age old struggle. The difference indeed is not "owed" because the new contract isn't backdated to the previous amenable date. Note that it's not a contract "expiration" date, it's an amenable date. If the contract expired, then there would be a stronger argument. There is really no legal or necessarily moral obligation (unless previously promised) to give back pay to a previous amenable date. That might be a provision that the union and company can work out in future contracts though.

Either way, anyone know where UA could even get ~140 Large RJ's and/or Large T-Props to get to that 325 cap? Would they have to either directly place an order or work with the regionals to make an order? How much availability is there in the second-hand market?
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:28 pm

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 13):
But the pilots also drag them out when they perceive a disadvantage as well, aka when all their peer groups are allowing more large RJ's and they feel threatened. Perceived job security vs. Dollar Pay, it's an age old struggle. The difference indeed is not "owed" because the new contract isn't backdated to the previous amenable date. Note that it's not a contract "expiration" date, it's an amenable date. If the contract expired, then there would be a stronger argument. There is really no legal or necessarily moral obligation (unless previously promised) to give back pay to a previous amenable date. That might be a provision that the union and company can work out in future contracts though.

That doesn't change the basic fact that dragging out the contract - without retro pay - just incentives the employer to not reach an agreement. Spin it any way you want, but CO's 4 year contract has lasted (very) nearly 8 years.

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 13):
Either way, anyone know where UA could even get ~140 Large RJ's and/or Large T-Props to get to that 325 cap? Would they have to either directly place an order or work with the regionals to make an order? How much availability is there in the second-hand market?

SkyWest would be big a winner, I'd guess. In any case, happy days are ahead for Bombardier and Embraer if the Tentative Agreement passes.

Assuming it passes, I wonder how many pilots UA will furlough...?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
futureualpilot
Posts: 2402
Joined: Thu May 25, 2000 10:52 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:30 pm

Some of the details on scope from another forum:

No 76-seat aircraft until Jan. 1, 2014; current legacy United 70-seat and turboprop limits until then
- After Jan 1, 2014: Cap 70-/76-seat aircraft at 255 hulls; no more than 130 76-seat aircraft
- Q400 included in 76-seat aircraft count limits (currently no limit in legacy Continental contract)
- UAL currently has 148 70-seat aircraft and 35 Q400s
- Under United Pilot Agreement definitions, UAL currently has 183 of the 255 70/76-seat aircraft
• After Jan. 1, 2016: Cap 76-seat aircraft at 153
• Can only go above 153 76-seat aircraft if new small narrowbody aircraft added to UAL fleet and forces reduction of 70-seat aircraft from 148 to 102 cap
• Must park 50-seat aircraft if going above 153 76-seat aircraft
• Maximum UAX hard cap of 450 total hulls, from current 588
• All 76-seat aircraft downgraded to 70-seats (remove seats) if furlough
• New small narrowbody aircraft – we fly it, forces reduction in UAX block hour ratio limit and number of 50- seat aircraft

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 14):
Assuming it passes, I wonder how many pilots UA will furlough...?

Given the proposed scope, and the retirement numbers UA will be looking at, I'm guessing 0 additional furloughs.
Life is better when you surf.
 
FriendlySkies
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:42 pm

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):
Some of the details on scope from another forum:

So, who said this was a "huge concession" on scope again? It looks pretty good to me, but I'm not management or a pilot. I read this as the pmUA scope with a lot more restrictions.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:48 pm

Giving up 76 seats RJs is a concession. The UA current Scope limit is 70 seats and the CO Scope limit is 50 (for jets).

IMHO, that's a large concession. Given that DL already set the "model," it is probably considered inevitable by many.

However, the UA Tentative Agreement appears to fall short of the DL model in other areas. The pilots I've talked to consider the T.A. to be concessionary.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5258
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:48 pm

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 16):
So, who said this was a "huge concession" on scope again? It looks pretty good to me, but I'm not management or a pilot. I read this as the pmUA scope with a lot more restrictions.

Which to all the former CO pilots is a huge concession....even many of the UA pilots wanted to get the 70+ seaters moved to mainline. Of course, realistically that was never going to happen given the scope clauses in play at DL/US.
 
futureualpilot
Posts: 2402
Joined: Thu May 25, 2000 10:52 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:05 pm

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 16):
So, who said this was a "huge concession" on scope again? It looks pretty good to me, but I'm not management or a pilot. I read this as the pmUA scope with a lot more restrictions.

Or pmCO scope relaxed quite a bit. It could be a lot worse in terms of how many are allowed or how large the UAX airplanes can be, but it isn't great. It more or less parrots what DL got.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 17):
Giving up 76 seats RJs is a concession. The UA current Scope limit is 70 seats and the CO Scope limit is 50 (for jets).
Quoting flyhossd (Reply 17):
IMHO, that's a large concession. Given that DL already set the "model," it is probably considered inevitable by many.

   Pretty well sums it up. Still a concession but it seems this will be the new "industry standard"
Life is better when you surf.
 
DualQual
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:10 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:10 pm

It's a huge concession in scope for no equity stake and Delta -8% pay rates. On paper it evens out in 2015 but that is DALs amendable date. Given the last DAL contract was achieved AHEAD of that date and this UAL stinker runs 2 years past that and it took 4 years to get this, major NO vote. If 76 seat scope is inevitable than DAL + it must be.
There's no known cure for stupid
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 274
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:43 pm

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):
Can only go above 153 76-seat aircraft if new small narrowbody aircraft added to UAL fleet and forces reduction of 70-seat aircraft from 148 to 102 cap
• Must park 50-seat aircraft if going above 153 76-seat aircraft
• Maximum UAX hard cap of 450 total hulls, from current 588
• All 76-seat aircraft downgraded to 70-seats (remove seats) if furlough
• New small narrowbody aircraft – we fly it, forces reduction in UAX block hour ratio limit and number of 50- seat aircraft

This smells like a C-Series order on the horizon
Parking 50 seaters was inevitable; so that is going to happen
I sort of like the poison pill for the furlough in terms of seat count, I think that is good for the pilots.
I like the increase in 70/76 seaters for some of us frequent flyers, with the decrease in 50 seaters; I think some of the frequencies out there area bit much

I'd like to see UAL move to more in house operations across the board...much more product control, but that does require some give on the part of employee groups to keep the spokes profitable.

Some of the existing routes need upgauging and/or frequency reduction anyway. The C-series or C-series like aircraft should do well in the UAL system.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 1863
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:13 pm

Its your classic case of carrots and sticks. UA is conceding on some points but is taking a line which I see as "harder" than DL on many points. From the company perspective, it keeps them above "par" economically with DL which is the name of the game with the majors now.
 
neveragain
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:59 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:13 pm

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):
Some of the details on scope from another forum:

Would you happen to know when the voting period ends?

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):
No 76-seat aircraft until Jan. 1, 2014; current legacy United 70-seat and turboprop limits until then

Forgive my ignorance, but is the current number of CR7/E70 aircraft a hard cap, or will it increase by bringing the ex-CO mainline aircraft into the fleet?

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):
- After Jan 1, 2014: Cap 70-/76-seat aircraft at 255 hulls; no more than 130 76-seat aircraft
- Q400 included in 76-seat aircraft count limits (currently no limit in legacy Continental contract)
- UAL currently has 148 70-seat aircraft and 35 Q400s
- Under United Pilot Agreement definitions, UAL currently has 183 of the 255 70/76-seat aircraft
• After Jan. 1, 2016: Cap 76-seat aircraft at 153
• Can only go above 153 76-seat aircraft if new small narrowbody aircraft added to UAL fleet and forces reduction of 70-seat aircraft from 148 to 102 cap
• Must park 50-seat aircraft if going above 153 76-seat aircraft
• Maximum UAX hard cap of 450 total hulls, from current 588

[/quote]

So there would be the flexibility to add 72 large RJs, net.

Assuming UA wanted the maximum, that would mean:

-130 76-seat aircraft

-125 70-seat, a reduction of 58 aircraft

-195 50-seat or smaller

In 2016, assuming the maximum and no new narrowbody aircraft:

-153 76-seat aircraft

-102 70-seat aircraft, a further reduction of 23 aircraft

-195 50-seat or smaller

Although it appears the 153 hard cap goes away, no?

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 21):
This smells like a C-Series order on the horizon

As a mainline-operated aircraft, right?

Well, from a passenger's perspective, I certainly hope it passes. But I don't think I'd ever want my customers voting on the terms of my employment contract. So my opinion is probably irrelevant.
 
mcdu
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:24 pm

Quoting DualQual (Reply 20):

It's a huge concession in scope for no equity stake and Delta -8% pay rates. On paper it evens out in 2015 but that is DALs amendable date. Given the last DAL contract was achieved AHEAD of that date and this UAL stinker runs 2 years past that and it took 4 years to get this, major NO vote. If 76 seat scope is inevitable than DAL + it must be.

Equity stake? We were given equity stake at BK exit, just like AA will and DL did. This contract overall has many better items in it than the previous contract and should pass the majority of pilots. Failure to accept this contract would be a huge mistake for the UAL pilots IMHO. The terms of our transition agreement expire in the spring and the company could significantly downsize the S-UA ops with parking of B757's that are getting long in the tooth with no required replacement with the expired TPA. The S-UA pilots have a great deal to lose by voting down this agreement.

Garnering billions in pay and work rules, vacation and other improvements should be something to say "yes" to.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:26 pm

Quoting DualQual (Reply 20):

It's a huge concession in scope for no equity stake and Delta -8% pay rates. On paper it evens out in 2015 but that is DALs amendable date. Given the last DAL contract was achieved AHEAD of that date and this UAL stinker runs 2 years past that and it took 4 years to get this, major NO vote. If 76 seat scope is inevitable than DAL + it must be.

Good post.

IIRC, CO pilots have been negotiating for nearly 5 years, UA pilots nearly 4. Then after the merger was announced, they started over for the joint contract.

From what I've seen, there's a lot of frustration by the pilots and being paid less than Delta pilots isn't going to change that. DL pilots will also benefit as they receive the B717s. Are there more airplanes - GROWTH airplanes - coming to United?

Off the top of my head, it seems that the pay rate increases don't even match inflation, so that's concessionary, too.

Will UA and CO ALPA hold another strike vote if this T.A. fails? As I recall, 99% voted in favor of striking this summer.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:29 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 24):
The terms of our transition agreement expire in the spring and the company could significantly downsize the S-UA ops with parking of B757's that are getting long in the tooth with no required replacement with the expired TPA.

I thought the sUA 757's were already on the way out of the fleet anyway with the incoming new build 737's as "replacements"......
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 2731
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:41 pm

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 25):
Are there more airplanes - GROWTH airplanes - coming to United?

To be fair, we don't really need GROWTH airplanes, we need growth in Aircraft per Pilot, in order to bring back those men and women from furlough, which is what we all really want. Hiring after that should be a secondary concern, lets look after our own before we think about those who may join the company at a later date.

With that, I want to say the answer is largely - No, not without another A/C order, at least by the numbers we see today.
 
UnitedTristar
Topic Author
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:47 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 26):
I thought the sUA 757's were already on the way out of the fleet anyway with the incoming new build 737's as "replacements"......

yea but from what I recall, the S-CO crews are on them, so if the S-UA crews loose the planes and the S-CO group picks them up, then what does that leave the S-UA pilots flying???   

-m

  
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:32 am

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 27):
To be fair, we don't really need GROWTH airplanes, we need growth in Aircraft per Pilot, in order to bring back those men and women from furlough, which is what we all really want. Hiring after that should be a secondary concern, lets look after our own before we think about those who may join the company at a later date.

From what I understand there aren't many furloughs left, and those that are will be drawn back in when the 65 cap hits.
sCO is hiring off the street, and those positions we offered to sUA furloughees first - a lot of whom took the offer and are now on 737s.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 1760
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:39 am

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 15):

I suggest the pilots vote this one down. Those are big concessions in scope with really nothing extraordinary in return.
 
futureualpilot
Posts: 2402
Joined: Thu May 25, 2000 10:52 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:51 am

Quoting neveragain (Reply 23):
Would you happen to know when the voting period ends?

I believe the voting period is Dec 1 - Dec 15

Quoting neveragain (Reply 23):
Forgive my ignorance, but is the current number of CR7/E70 aircraft a hard cap, or will it increase by bringing the ex-CO mainline aircraft into the fleet?

I want to say it is a hard cap, but I'm not 100% sure, perhaps a current UA/CO pilot can answer that. (I'm still stuck in the "future" part of my username, working on it though!)

Quoting neveragain (Reply 23):
Although it appears the 153 hard cap goes away, no?

Only if mainline narrow bodies are added and 50 seaters are removed, is how I read it.
Life is better when you surf.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:59 am

Quoting UnitedTristar (Reply 28):
yea but from what I recall, the S-CO crews are on them, so if the S-UA crews loose the planes and the S-CO group picks them up, then what does that leave the S-UA pilots flying???

I've heard & read that the sUA 757 pilots are transitioning to the 737.....
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
mcdu
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:06 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 26):
I thought the sUA 757's were already on the way out of the fleet anyway with the incoming new build 737's as "replacements"......

Those planes are not necessarily going to be flown by S-UA pilots. The TPA agreement we have would force the company to replace the S-UA fleet count with replacements. That agreement expired last year and they renewed it with ALPA allowing (conceding) S-CO bases in DEN,SFO and ORD and S-UA base in IAH. Nothing the company really needs to extend the next one for. So when the TPA expires they can just push all those NEW 737's to the S-CO side where they have a training program, pay rate, etc, etc, etc in place to fly the airplanes. Absolutely no reason to have the added cost of a separate B737 program on the S-UA side when they can just reduce the fleet with the commensurate number of pilot retirements.

This past week there was a bid for B747 Captains on the S-UA side. In the past this would trigger many additional bids to the airplanes where these B747 Captains were coming from. The telling side of this was that there were ZERO B757/767 bids filled from the movement. The fix is in. We vote yes and we integrate. We vote NO and they operate separately while killing the S-UA side off.

Quoting UnitedTristar (Reply 28):
yea but from what I recall, the S-CO crews are on them, so if the S-UA crews loose the planes and the S-CO group picks them up, then what does that leave the S-UA pilots flying???   

-m

Absolutely true.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 30):
I suggest the pilots vote this one down. Those are big concessions in scope with really nothing extraordinary in return.

Have you read the entire terms of the SCOPE agreement? The UA scope is as good or better than DL in this contract. The payrates are in the UA contract for E-190, C-Series etc aircraft.
 
DualQual
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:10 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:24 am

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):

Those planes are absolutely going to be flown by sUA pilots as they replace sUA 757s. That provision often TPA did not expire and was not altered by the amendment. Orders to replace aircraft at a subsidiary will be flown by that subsidiary. The only way an sCO pilot will touch the controls of an airplane in that order will be after the ISL after ratification of a JCBA worth voting yes too. This TA ain't it.
There's no known cure for stupid
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 1760
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:24 am

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
Have you read the entire terms of the SCOPE agreement? The UA scope is as good or better than DL in this contract. The payrates are in the UA contract for E-190, C-Series etc aircraft.

Does UA really want to set DL as the benchmark to beat in scope? That's a very low bar to clear.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:26 am

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
Absolutely no reason to have the added cost of a separate B737 program on the S-UA side

You don't need a separate 737 program. Just train the sUA pilots to fly the 737. Its not that difficult to do.

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
We vote yes and we integrate. We vote NO and they operate separately while killing the S-UA side off.

Well, then vote yes and keep the company going. I would hate to see the sUA pilots out on the street. I hope they see that.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
hhslax2
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:16 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:59 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 36):
Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
Absolutely no reason to have the added cost of a separate B737 program on the S-UA side

You don't need a separate 737 program. Just train the sUA pilots to fly the 737. Its not that difficult to do.

Wouldn't sUA already have a pay scale for 737 in the last agreement, since they retired their last 737 in the Fall of 2009? Or would the NG not be covered because UA flew classics?
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:10 am

Quoting hhslax2 (Reply 37):
Wouldn't sUA already have a pay scale for 737 in the last agreement, since they retired their last 737 in the Fall of 2009?

I think that covers the classics, not sure if there is a provision in the contract that talks about "in case the 737NG enters the fleet" clause.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
mcdu
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:41 am

The previous pay scale for 737 was -309/500 specific. There is no pay rate in current contract for a -900.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 274
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:43 am

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 30):
I suggest the pilots vote this one down. Those are big concessions in scope with really nothing extraordinary in return

After all of this time and effort by the union reps and management to come to this agreement? Do you think the union chiefs would deliver something to the rank and file knowing it would get voted down? From an outsider's perspective, I hope that is not the case. As others have said, the "bonus" payout is probably hush money, and most, if not all, will take that bait everytime.


I know some frequent flyers have defected, how many UAL pilots have defected to Delta for the better contract?
 
futureualpilot
Posts: 2402
Joined: Thu May 25, 2000 10:52 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:27 am

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 40):
I know some frequent flyers have defected, how many UAL pilots have defected to Delta for the better contract?

Starting over with mileage building, and starting your professional career over is an apples - grenades comparison.
Life is better when you surf.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:51 am

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
Those planes are not necessarily going to be flown by S-UA pilots.

Let's be clear on this. The most recent order of 737-900ERs is entirely destined for S-UA, to be flown and crewed by S-UA.

NS
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:51 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
Those planes are not necessarily going to be flown by S-UA pilots. The TPA agreement we have would force the company to replace the S-UA fleet count with replacements. That agreement expired last year and they renewed it with ALPA allowing (conceding) S-CO bases in DEN,SFO and ORD and S-UA base in IAH. Nothing the company really needs to extend the next one for. So when the TPA expires they can just push all those NEW 737's to the S-CO side where they have a training program, pay rate, etc, etc, etc in place to fly the airplanes. Absolutely no reason to have the added cost of a separate B737 program on the S-UA side when they can just reduce the fleet with the commensurate number of pilot retirements.
Quoting mcdu (Reply 33):
We vote yes and we integrate. We vote NO and they operate separately while killing the S-UA side off.

You GROSSLY overestimate the ability of the Training Departments! That is, there's no way they can replace that many pilots, they've been having a very hard time in just the last few years keeping up with recurrent training.

Quoting DualQual (Reply 34):
Those planes are absolutely going to be flown by sUA pilots as they replace sUA 757s. That provision of the TPA did not expire and was not altered by the amendment. Orders to replace aircraft at a subsidiary will be flown by that subsidiary. The only way an sCO pilot will touch the controls of an airplane in that order will be after the ISL after ratification of a JCBA worth voting yes too. This TA ain't it.

I have a copy of the TPA and that's the way I read it, too. So the most recently ordered 737-900ERs will be flown by L-UAL pilots until the seniority lists are integrated.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:01 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 42):
The most recent order of 737-900ERs is entirely destined for S-UA, to be flown and crewed by S-UA.

   That is exactly what was said in employee publications and I believe Smisek has said something about it as well.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
mcdu
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:08 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 42):
Let's be clear on this. The most recent order of 737-900ERs is entirely destined for S-UA, to be flown and crewed by S-UA.

The company indicated those are destined for S-UA replacements. However, those airplanes are not on the property to replace the 757's. Just as easy to defer those planes and keep the S-CO planes coming. Ironic that many that never believe a word spoken by management all of sudden feel airplanes that exist on paper and "promised" would actually take place. If you are S-UA pilot you should know how things play out around here. There are NO guarantees in this business, especially airplanes that we don't have, a pay rate that doesn't exist or a training program. Those cost will be weighed and if we say NO to this TA expect to see rough air ahead on the S-UA pilot side. I wish it wasn't this way but we are at the end of the lever.

After reading the TA myself I am happy with many of the provisions that are added. Most if not all of the S-UA protections were retained and improved upon.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 45):
However, those airplanes are not on the property to replace the 757's.

I think you need to go back and look at the employee publications because it was explicitly written in there about that. I don't recall which publications, but I do remember that it was written in there and it was highly talked about in several work groups.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:09 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 45):
The company indicated those are destined for S-UA replacements. However, those airplanes are not on the property to replace the 757's.

Yes, they are. It was clearly stated when the order was announced; they are replacements for the L-UAL 757s.

Quoting mcdu (Reply 45):
There are NO guarantees in this business, especially airplanes that we don't have, a pay rate that doesn't exist or a training program.

True, there are no guarantees, but the pay rate will exist soon enough and the training program already does exist (CO has been flying the -900s for years, eh?).

You seem to fear an "Eastern Airlines" scenario, but IMHO, it's a very flawed comparison. There's NO WAY that both Training Departments, running at maximum capacity, could replace the UA pilots. And then there are the retirements to consider...

Don't vote based on fear. Vote based on a rational analysis. From what I've seen of the T.A., it doesn't even match DL's contract. I have yet to find a UA or CO pilot that's supporting the T.A. (you're the lone exception).

[Edited 2012-11-14 12:37:30]
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
mcdu
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:17 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 46):
I think you need to go back and look at the employee publications because it was explicitly written in there about that. I don't recall which publications, but I do remember that it was written in there and it was highly talked about in several work groups.

You don't seem to understand what I was saying. Yes, I agree they said those were S-UA replacements for 757's. however, s-UA has not taken delivery of any airplanes. So far all the deliveries to dare are for S-CO. No reason to think that if ALPA balks at the contract and that the company saves money by NOT delivering these to the S-UA side in a divided airline.

They can whittle down our side with retirements. Just look at the latest bud closing. Lots of guys leaving the 757 and NO backfills. If the economy doesn't improve, we continue to merger issues then the divided house will go to the S-CO.


Hossd, I am not voting out of fear. After reading the TA it looks like a decent agreement. What are your complaints? I've spoken to numerous other pilots and they are all in favor of the agreement. My opinion is this contract dollar for dollar is as good or better than the DL agreement and to be quite honest I don't look at DL as the standard. We can continue to wait it out for years looking for the perfect contract that may never come. In the meantime those are dollars gone and never recouped at 100%.

When was the last contract that paid 100% retro in the airline industry? How much time did ALPA waste fighting over banding, MEC recalls and various other infighting issues? Those were all delays imposed by the pur side. We are responsible for much of the time delay.

Guess we will find out when the voting is complete.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

UA/CO Pilots Ratify New Contract

Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:22 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 48):
So far all the deliveries to dare are for S-CO.

I hope you realize that UA and CO is now one company, there is no more Continental. The planes are being delivered saying "UNITED" on them. Isn't the Operating Certificate now one?

Continental is gone.

[Edited 2012-11-14 13:24:24]
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.

Who is online