Quoting BC77008 (Reply 49): Quoting copter808 (Reply 41): However, regardless of the origin of the crew, I too often fly with the "8-hour cup" on my table. The cup that has been empty for 8 hours, yet has not been picked up yet. When the flight attendants come around with a trash bag and say "You're trash, ma'am. You're trash sir. Your child's trash. You're trash. Your wife's trash." That is when you are suppose to put it in the trash bag.

Oh, man! That's hilarious...   

Not to derail the thread. However a good point about the 8 hour cup. The FA's on here think it is the passengers responsibility however I gathered from the poster that he was sitting in a premium cabin. The FA's have lost a sense of what service a premium cabin service should be conducted. There should be no trash bags in the aisle in F or J. These passengers generate most of our revenue and if you would rather hide in the galley complaining about your contract or loss of flying then you shouldn't be working a premium cabin.

The best thing UA could do would be to put the ghost riders on the plane to QC the FA's. The FA's that want to bemoan their lot in life should be retrained or let go. It is not UA's fault you don't have a transition agreement. It is not UA's fault you don't have a contract (realistic negation on the part of the AFA are needed).

Show up and be a profession that you claim to be or find another line of work. The world is full of choices. No flying is guaranteed. I still here pilots complaining about the closure of the MIA pilot base. Claiming a conspiracy by UA to target them and make their lives miserable with a commute. The victim mentality amongst employees needs to stop. Oscar has said and done some good things. I think he may be able to unify the group but the ones that will never be happy to move on to greener pastures.

So happy to see the 787 being used in these "target " markets. I think this airplane is giving UA a competitive advantage over DL. Will be interesting to see if AA deploys their 787's similarly or will they be flying them on traditional large market to large market. Originally I had serious concerns about the 787 reliability but the teething pains have seemed to be overcome and the reliability is markedly improved. I believe the majority of UA employees want the company to be great and are working in that direction. The outliers will perhaps be shown the door and we can all move toward brighter futures together.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):

Is Daxing still going to be a domestic only airport?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 52): Is Daxing still going to be a domestic only airport?

Looks like Skyteam airlines will be focused at Daxing. CZ will be main tenant. AFKL said it would move also.

Quoting Mcdu (Reply 51): . I still here pilots complaining about the closure of the MIA pilot base. Claiming a conspiracy by UA to target them and make their lives miserable

I hear pretty much the same thing from ex MIA techs, "MIA was closed because the company made too much money and therefore they wanted to cut our pay" Seriously!

Quoting Mcdu (Reply 51): So happy to see the 787 being used in these "target " markets. I think this airplane is giving UA a competitive advantage over DL. Will be interesting to see if AA deploys their 787's similarly or will they be flying them on traditional large market to large market. Originally I had serious concerns about the 787 reliability but the teething pains have seemed to be overcome and the reliability is markedly improved. I believe the majority of UA employees want the company to be great and are working in that direction. The outliers will perhaps be shown the door and we can all move toward brighter futures together.

This should settle the question once and for all whether the 787 was a game-changer. Without it, routes like SFO-CTU/XIY/HGH/SIN/TLV simply won't be launched. And UA SFO is definitely on a major roll, with route announcements just within the last 6 months to XIY, HGH, SIN, TLV, and AKL, far ahead of just about every other hub.

It's humorous to see dinosaurs from the bygone era still bickering about why UA cancelled NRT-BKK (on another forum) while the rest of the world has moved far ahead of that mentality.

Quoting dash400 (Reply 27): OF COURSE it friggin matters !! All the good flying from my home base in SFO has been going to s-CO flight attendants...ALL OF IT !! So sick of this !! We on the classic UNITED side have been decimated here in SFO...new hires on the s-CO side have been getting straight flying lines and us with 10, 15 or more years on the s-UA side have been left with Reserve and crappy domestic flights. Our upper management has NO interest in our well-being, just for their sweethearts, s-CO !!! The flying public (most of them, anyway) are so friggin' ignorant of what's going on. There is animosity between the two work groups....our Facebook discussion pages are full of snide and condescending remarks. WE NEED TO change that awful CONTINENTAL globe once our work groups are all truly merged !!

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 28): Salty much? Ever think that the merged contract for pilots says that CO crews fly their aircraft until the 25th 787 comes? That 787 is here. CO and UA pilots can fly the 787. And not every route is going to handle the 747 or 777. NO one says you have to stay in SFO. The company doesn't care what crew is in the plane, as long as the plane is the right on for the job.

Quoting adamblang (Reply 30): Tell your union representatives you want a unified contract. Problem goes "poof" after that. In the meantime, route planners are putting the right aircraft on the right route.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 31): The carrier isn't doing it to spite the sUA side, they are doing it because the 787 is the perfect aircraft for those TPAC routes. If there was a combined agreement then all of you on the sUA would be eligible to bid 787 lines, and what's more you would be able to hold them as sCO-SFO (and LAX) is so junior. Get the AFA to take the negotiations seriously and you will get your flying back.

Quoting rwsea (Reply 38): Then get your union leaders to do their job and get a combined contract finalized. And be willing to vote yes on a compromise. The FAs only screw themselves by refusing to compromise on a combined contract.

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 39): Wow! So much hate and anger. Why don't you do something about it instead of complaining about Continental. Get your union leaders to work for you. But you also have to be prepared to compromise on a contract. You aren't going to get everything you want -- and that's a sign of a healthy negotiation. Both sides winning but not getting every desire. I hope you don't treat our customers this way or air dirty laundry to them.

Quoting copter808 (Reply 41): Get over it and move on. It's this kind of thinking that is responsible for much of the problem. Fortunately, I have had the opportunity to fly with crews from both sides of the merger and things seem to be improving. However, regardless of the origin of the crew, I too often fly with the "8-hour cup" on my table. The cup that has been empty for 8 hours, yet has not been picked up yet.

Quoting bioyuki (Reply 42): As a SFO based former UA 1K, crew like you are yet another reason why I've given up my status and moved my dollars to NH, SQ, CX, the ME3 and others. The flying public might be ignorant of what's going on, but they really don't care. All the notice are the grumpy, ill tempered flight attendants like you who make travel terrible.

Quoting frostyj (Reply 44): Why do you care so much? You are still flying on United. Very petty behaviour from a so called professional.

Quoting United Airline (Reply 46): I suppose there are sUA staff/flight than sCO staff/flight right? I guess this flight is a sUA flight operated by sUA staff right? The A350-1000 will be sUA too right?

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 47): Did you read any of the thread? This route will be sCO.

Wow!
Is this what these meetings/negotiations are like as well?

I can't believe there's no agreement in place. Merger started in 2010.
You realize management doesn't mind division and acrimony right? You're making your pathetic case, like this. Wise up and become a mighty unified force instead!

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56): I can't believe there's no agreement in place. Merger started in 2010. You realize management doesn't mind division and acrimony right? You're making your pathetic case, like this. Wise up and become a mighty unified force instead!

Right on! ...and everyone wonders why our fabulous airlines fell from grace! Service-grace, that is... Business-grace is quite healthy.

This is the existing feed network already in place for the upcoming HGH service.



[Edited 2016-03-04 10:38:27]

HGH would not have been my first choice, initially. But now being filled in on what HGH is about, by you guys, it makes sense.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 26): It's a great change of corporate philosophy that they're willing to test waters with 3x weekly. The old mentality focusing on business routes is that nothing less than 6x weekly is feasible, thus leaving a lot of nascent emerging opportunities on the table.

I like the change in that philosophy. The new SFO international structure is great for Asia, using the 787. Now do this for Europe, too...... As in FCO and DME.

A hypothetical SFO-SZX service can also capture traffic to Dongguan City (sandwiched between Guangzhou and Shenzhen). Because of how north CAN is located relative to the city of Guangzhou, from Dongguan it's 1:05 to SZX but up to 1:25 to CAN, so SZX is every bit competitive with that traffic. Dongguan lacks its own airport so CAN or SZX is a must.

Those 2 cities together has USD $550B on GDP (PPP) in 2013 and a whopping 18.6m population (which is already excluding any leak-over traffic from the exurbs of CAN and HKG).

And this is before we account for any upstream feed from ZH. This is something that UA should seriously look into as their next wish list.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 60):

Very good points, here. SZX makes a lot of sense to me. But there is always the nagging "too close to areas covered by HKG/CAN" business that comes up. It is good that you are pointing the lesser-known points of how valuable SFO-SZX could be.

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 61): Very good points, here. SZX makes a lot of sense to me. But there is always the nagging "too close to areas covered by HKG/CAN" business that comes up. It is good that you are pointing the lesser-known points of how valuable SFO-SZX could be.

The proximity argument works in the early days of the market. Once it begins maturing and airlines are ready to enter more 2nd tier airports, the basis for that argument gradually chips away.

We have 3 very close airports in eastern China with TPAC service already - PVG NKG HGH. There are 3 airports in southern greater China with SYD service - CAN SZX HKG. CTU+CKG are a bit further apart, but each has European service on its own. This trend bodes well for future service to SZX CAN CKG TSN etc, as Dolphin747 has mentioned earlier.

Regarding the ferry to HKG airport, Dongguan to HKG takes 1:40, and only departs 5 times a day. It really adds a lot to your travel time once you add in buffer time to account for potential delays. (and a ferry has to travel much slower during days of heavy fog)

You guys can really forget the SZX discussion. It has no interest for UA. VP of network even said so in a Q&A.

Hong Kong which butts right up to Shenzhen serves as the the gateway. You can travel between the two by car, bus, MTR, taxi or the 20 odd ferry sailings directly from HKG airport without even clearing customs in 30-45mins.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 63): You guys can really forget the SZX discussion. It has no interest for UA. VP of network even said so in a Q&A. Hong Kong which butts right up to Shenzhen serves as the the gateway. You can travel between the two by car, bus, MTR, taxi or the 20 odd ferry sailings directly from HKG airport without even clearing customs in 30-45mins.

What about CAN? That would be really nice. It has train service that links to the entire city of 20 million people. Plus the airport serves 50+ million per year with no US carrier serving it!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 63): Hong Kong which butts right up to Shenzhen serves as the the gateway. You can travel between the two by car, bus, MTR, taxi or the 20 odd ferry sailings directly from HKG airport without even clearing customs in 30-45mins.

         They would add a second flight to HKG from SFO long before SZX.

Quoting joeljack (Reply 64): What about CAN?

UA actually held rights for SFO-CANa few years ago but never launched it....I know why they didn't launch it at the time but am unsure of why it never came back on the radar.

Quoting joeljack (Reply 64): What about CAN? That would be really nice. It has train service that links to the entire city of 20 million people. Plus the airport serves 50+ million per year with no US carrier serving it!

I have not heard anything about CAN recently at UA, but I suspect its network people will soon think of it the same they do as SZX.

From what I gather the Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong HSR is scheduled to open in 2018 with travel time from Guangzhou to HK being under 1-hour. (its 38mins today from Guangzhou to Shenzen)

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 63): You guys can really forget the SZX discussion. It has no interest for UA. VP of network even said so in a Q&A.

Did the VP hint what's next on his list ?

Quoting a380787 (Reply 67): Did the VP hint what's next on his list ?

They are going after markets that 1) Have high demand from corporate clients (eg CTU and HGH) and 2) markets that offer incentives and I presume 3) large enough to sustain demand without being fully reliant on 1&2.

Quoting juukeihc (Thread starter): Reported by Civil Aviation Resource Net of China (CARNOC.com)

36 hours later, where is the confirmation from UA?

Quoting Rdh3e (Reply 69): 36 hours later, where is the confirmation from UA?

UA wont say anything until they notify the DOT.

Airlines are always working on applications and things overseas behind the scenes lining up their ducks which dont become public. In this case by chance the info leaked about their application with CAAC.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 63): You guys can really forget the SZX discussion. It has no interest for UA. VP of network even said so in a Q&A.

They said the same thing two years ago about ATH service, too. And guess what, it's coming back in May!

Seems that most new flights/aircraft are flown by sCO staff

Anything for sUA staff? B777-300ER? A350-1000? B787-9?

Chinese media seems to take this as done deal. Even got a quote from UA sales VP which does not say much.

United to Fly 787 to Hangzhou, China in July
http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/51/51194.html

=

I was thinking, should United have kept more 787-8 orders v converting them to larger variants?

My thinking is that given the smaller size of a 787-8, it may be closer to right size for some of these secondary China markets. (Or, conservatively launch or relaunch non-stops non-Chinese destinations and around the globe where something larger may be difficult to fill?)

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 59): I like the change in that philosophy. The new SFO international structure is great for Asia, using the 787. Now do this for Europe, too...... As in FCO and DME.

I would love to see MOW back on the United network but I don't think it will happen. IAD didn't work although arguably, SFO is a better option being such a fortress hub for UA.

Quoting UALCSR (Reply 75): I would love to see MOW back on the United network but I don't think it will happen. IAD didn't work although arguably, SFO is a better option being such a fortress hub for UA.

The problem with Moscow is UA didn't do it right in the first place. You already had SVO service on SU already out of IAD, so it was a bit redundant. Putting a MOW flight out of ORD would not have worked, either, since AA started off ORD-DME at roughly the same time. NYC already had service, which would be redundant, and MIA would not work either, since UA de-hubbed it .

And SFO, which is one of the strongest markets for Russia....well, it was kind of "left out in the cold". At least DL recognized this, and had SFO as a tag-on, as a change-of-gauge, SFO-JFK-SVO. Involving SFO, in any way, shape, or form, would have made the difference between success and failure of that flight. They could have ran some ads in the Russian-language newspapers in SFO, especially, but they didn't.

The new agenda with the 787 doing the "long-thin" routes from SFO(i.e. XIY, TLV, CTU) is a perfect fit for SFO-DME. Additionally, partner LH has trimmed down its service to non-MOW, non-LED markets. Previously, LH would have FRA to SVX, KUF, GOJ, etc....but they no longer exist. So instead of a nice one-stop using SFO-FRA, it's now a minimum of two-stops from SFO to these places. SFO-DME could connect to Russian domestic carriers, who are non-partner, but then again, there is almost no Star presence in secondary Russia anyway.

SFO-DME would work perfectly, in the context of the 3x/week plan using the 787. Time it right, and promote it at SFO(and in SEA/PDX, to a lesser extent).

Quoting dash400 (Reply 27): Quoting Mcdu (Reply 9): quote=United Airline,reply=4] Will this be flown by sUA staff? /quote] Does it matter if it is sUA or sCO? They are all United Flight Attendants trained to the same level, serving the same service OF COURSE it friggin matters !! All the good flying from my home base in SFO has been going to s-CO flight attendants...ALL OF IT !! So sick of this !! We on the classic UNITED side have been decimated here in SFO...new hires on the s-CO side have been getting straight flying lines and us with 10, 15 or more years on the s-UA side have been left with Reserve and crappy domestic flights. Our upper management has NO interest in our well-being, just for their sweethearts, s-CO !!! The flying public (most of them, anyway) are so friggin' ignorant of what's going on. There is animosity between the two work groups....our Facebook discussion pages are full of snide and condescending remarks. WE NEED TO change that awful CONTINENTAL globe once our work groups are all truly merged !!

And a lot of the good flying from MY home base in EWR has gone to SubUA. We sure aren't feeling the "sweetheart" treatment like you are referring to. Your snide and condescending comments are uncalled for; both sides are feeling the burn, not just your polarized SFO domicile. The company loves the fact that we are fighting with each other; classic management conquer and divide. I honestly wish more would see the big picture, and stop placing blame on the other subsidiaries' flight attendants. Peace

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 76): SFO-DME would work perfectly, in the context of the 3x/week plan using the 787. Time it right, and promote it at SFO(and in SEA/PDX, to a lesser extent).

Good points in your post! Would you know what the market is between the SFO area and MOW? Seems LA has a large expat Russian community and SV serves LAX but I'm not sure how the O/D and feed would be locally from/into SFO.

Quoting UALCSR (Reply 78): Good points in your post! Would you know what the market is between the SFO area and MOW? Seems LA has a large expat Russian community and SV serves LAX but I'm not sure how the O/D and feed would be locally from/into SFO.

As far as actual numbers, I don't know off the top my head. But the group of people in the Bay Area is a bit different/diverse than LAX or SEA......there tend to be more people from Eastern parts of Russia, such as KHV/VVO/UUS, etc. in SEA.........L.A.'s Russian population has grown quite a few bit the past couple of decades, and mostly connected to Moscow. (I think North Hollywood is the "Russian Capital of SoCal", IIRC)>

SFO Bay Area is a bit more diverse. You have people from all regions of Russia in San Francisco itself. Santa Rosa, which is a bit further out, has a fair percentage of Russians, too..........plus you have other ethnic groups in the Bay Area that travel to, or through, Moscow.....Jewish, Armenian, Georgian, etc.

Quoting dash400 (Reply 27): OF COURSE it friggin matters

To our customers, no, it doesn't matter. Ultimately, that is who this is about...the customer. They should get seamless service the way United wants us to provide service, regardless of where we started.

Fact is we are ALL United.

As for contractual issues, this really isn't the forum to "air our laundry".

As for the "they stole", "they took", "we lost" rhetoric, the company is doing what they can do maximize yields and money for the company, the shareholders and the Board. They don't take into consideration "sides".

This is my second merger with this airline and firmly believe it will work itself out in the end and the customer is the one who will benefit most!

A little ot, but when do most West Coast flights depart for Asia and return to the US?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 81): A little ot, but when do most West Coast flights depart for Asia and return to the US?

The usual pattern is that West Coast to Asia departs early afternoon, arriving in Asia late afternoon the following day (i.e leave at 1:30pm, arrive around 4:30pm). Flights back to the US depart early evening and arrive in the morning in the US. It's basically the opposite of US to Europe.

Its official

United's Summer of Global Expansion Continues with Fifth New Route from Asia/Pacific Gateway: San Francisco-Hangzhou, China
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/united...expansion-continues-213000662.html

=

Eff July 13

MoWeSa
UA982 SFO-HGH 1415-1810+1

MoWeFr
UA983 HGH-SFO 1130-0825

787-9

In the DOT application, United says it requests flexibility to operate Hangzhou on a seasonal basis so that it has the ability to adjust frequency levels to meet demand.

Also interestingly in its internal news releases it refers to Hangzhou with its 9-million population as part of the "greater Shanghai metro area."
Suppose with UA's inability to secure a slot at PVG for its planned 2nd daily SFO-PVG flight for 2-years now, accessing Hangzhou is a backdoor means to provide more capacity into the same region.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 84): Suppose with UA's inability to secure a slot at PVG for its planned 2nd daily SFO-PVG flight for 2-years now, accessing Hangzhou is a backdoor means to provide more capacity into the same region.

Any chance they might also consider SFO-NKG as yet another backdoor ?

Would UA be interested in flying to URC? It's China's gateway to Central Asia, a region that Star Alliance, and UA, are especially weak in.

Quoting Mcdu (Reply 51): So happy to see the 787 being used in these "target " markets. I think this airplane is giving UA a competitive advantage over DL. Will be interesting to see if AA deploys their 787's similarly or will they be flying them on traditional large market to large market. Originally I had serious concerns about the 787 reliability but the teething pains have seemed to be overcome and the reliability is markedly improved. I believe the majority of UA employees want the company to be great and are working in that direction. The outliers will perhaps be shown the door and we can all move toward brighter futures together.

Ooh, how I remember that- You had zero confidence in the 787 and made it known, and most of us gave you sh*t for it   Glad to see you did come around  

Approved by DOT today.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 86): Would UA be interested in flying to URC? It's China's gateway to Central Asia, a region that Star Alliance, and UA, are especially weak in.

I don't believe it has any ties to the US, economically or demographically. It's neither a big business or tourist or VFR destination for Americans. For URC the priority should be getting more service to the rest of the Islamic world; they don't have service to KUL, DOH, or AUH currently so SFO is probably decades down, if ever.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 89):

We're not supposed to say "never", but URC is as close to "never" as a medium sized Chinese city can get. Its ties are entirely with Asia Minor and the Islamic ME.

Quoting dash400 (Reply 27): OF COURSE it friggin matters !! All the good flying from my home base in SFO has been going to s-CO flight attendants...ALL OF IT !!

And people wonder why United has such a lousy reputation for customer service...

Quoting MaxxFlyer (Reply 91): And people wonder why United has such a lousy reputation for customer service

They have for many years now.


http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjourna...2B/2008/06/Worst-Airline-Ever.html


On the other hand CO had an excellent reputation premerger. Unfortunately it seems the least of both is what emerged.

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 92): On the other hand CO had an excellent reputation premerger. Unfortunately it seems the least of both is what emerged.

One thing I never understood. CO had a great reputation pre-merger. Seems like there have been very few harmonious mergers.

Quoting MaxxFlyer (Reply 93): never understood. CO had a great reputation pre-merger. Seems like there have been very few harmonious mergers.

Plain and simply the merger was poorly executed. Pro and con both carriers had their legacy and "mythology" that pax and employees alike connected to before. The post merger company lost both, this alienated everyone AND it performed poorly. It will be interesting to see what the next year or two brings.

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 94): Plain and simply the merger was poorly executed. Pro and con both carriers had their legacy and "mythology" that pax and employees alike connected to before. The post merger company lost both, this alienated everyone AND it performed poorly. It will be interesting to see what the next year or two brings.

That's what happens when you give an accountant the task of running an entire airline   Now that there is a change at the top, one can at least look to the future with some hope. So far so good. Things appear to be improving markedly.

Quoting COEWR787 (Reply 95): That's what happens when you give an accountant the task of running an entire airline Now that there is a change at the top, one can at least look to the future with some hope. So far so good. Things appear to be improving markedly.

If you are referring to Smisek, he was a lawyer, not an accountant.