kaitakfan wrote:calpsafltskeds wrote:CriticalPoint wrote:[twoid][/twoid]
Out sourcing to the lowest bidder is not the right way to grow your airline. Kirby can buy as many 737s as he wants we are not stopping him. And we will happily fly the 100 seater into the hubs to fill them.
Sorry to say, but a JetBlue pilot presentation on the internet shows a UA E195 12 captain would earn about $160/hr vs $203/hr. for a 737. I'm not sure how old that is, but I would assume the 100 seat category would still earn less than a 319 or 737 for UA pilots.
Of course its more efficient to buy a 737 from the company view, but I just don't understand why UA pilots wouldn't rather fly a 737 at a 26% premium to the EMB195? And how many more 737s would UA buy if it opened up additional 76 seaters?
If UA bought 100 seat aircraft, just how many would UA purchase and how many better paying 737s would they not order? Remember with each 100 seater, UA gets to add roughly a 76 seater, which is close enough to the 100 seat capacity, thus UA pilots would not get a job for all the "demand" for the 100 seat aircraft as 76 seaters would do a portion of that demand.
So, who determines if a 100 seat aircraft at UA is profitable with mainline pilots (which would provide 50, 76, 100, 120, 180 seat sizes for narrobodies) vs. a gap in seat sizes between 76 and 120? That determination is not by the pilots, rather the pilots have placed management in a pocition to buy larger aircraft and they would love to see more 76 seaters to connect larger passenger counts to those larger aircraft, which pay more for UA pilots.
With a downturn of upturn, everyone would seem to be better off if the 76 seat category were ruled by an ironclad agreement based on a percentage of narrowbodies - maybe its not 40% like American, but it needs to provide some relief to grow express seat sizes as the skies and airports get more traffic and UA buys more larger narrobody aircraft (which pay UA pilots more per hour).
Did we not have an order of 60 something 737-700’s get axes due to the company stating they were not efficient? The 737 can’t fill the need for a 100 seat market and the company knows that. Many United pilots that understand the hazards of giving on scope would rather get the 100 seaters on property and then work on the pay rates vs giving up scope.
And finally this iron clad term you throw around means NOTHING in bankruptcy courts. History repeats its self like none other in this industry. If you haven’t seen your career completely burned to the ground from bankruptcy, please give a little bit of respect to those that have and are standing their ground to make sure they do whatever they can to prevent history from repeating.
Of everything I’ve ever read before, your last passage about what happened to people historically during bankruptcy really got me. I feel tremendous empathy. Given that UA seems to be on an upswing in many ways today, I hope it ultimately makes way for brighter and more prosperous futures for everyone.
There is zero doubt that a satisfied and happy United team of employees make flying United better for customers.