Mesa 3.0
01-12-2018, 04:41 AM
#5391
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2017
Posts: 129
Question on the travel planner
I mostly love the new way of booking flights (not having to give 72 hours notice to the pass bureau and being able to check in in advance), but I do not like how our ability to see how many (if any) jumpseaters are booked on any given flight has disappeared. Is there another way to do it? We used to be able to see that on Wings.
01-12-2018, 05:00 AM
#5392
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 688
I mostly love the new way of booking flights (not having to give 72 hours notice to the pass bureau and being able to check in in advance), but I do not like how our ability to see how many (if any) jumpseaters are booked on any given flight has disappeared. Is there another way to do it? We used to be able to see that on Wings.
01-12-2018, 07:30 AM
#5393
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2017
Posts: 129
01-12-2018, 08:32 AM
#5394
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 688
01-13-2018, 05:36 AM
#5396
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 2,145
Agreed. They wouldn’t get rid of them unless they were cancelling the entire UA contract due to poor performance. The 700’s were lifesavers this month by replacing Ejet routes that couldn’t be flown due to a lack of crews.
01-13-2018, 11:31 AM
#5397
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 774
Wrong. The CPA’s are negotiated in separate batches. The erj’s and the 700’s are on a different agreement/time interval. I believe there are even separate agreements for different erj batches respective to the various equipment use awards. Just because the staffing on the 700’s is better, doesn’t mean UA can’t and/or won’t cancel or amend one CPA or another for not meeting performance metrics. The staffing numbers of one airplane or another isn’t UA’s problem.
01-13-2018, 12:41 PM
#5398
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 2,145
Wrong. The CPA’s are negotiated in separate batches. The erj’s and the 700’s are on a different agreement/time interval. I believe there are even separate agreements for different erj batches respective to the various equipment use awards. Just because the staffing on the 700’s is better, doesn’t mean UA can’t and/or won’t cancel or amend one CPA or another for not meeting performance metrics. The staffing numbers of one airplane or another isn’t UA’s problem.
01-15-2018, 07:44 PM
#5399
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Captain
Posts: 1,561
Wrong. The CPA’s are negotiated in separate batches. The erj’s and the 700’s are on a different agreement/time interval. I believe there are even separate agreements for different erj batches respective to the various equipment use awards. Just because the staffing on the 700’s is better, doesn’t mean UA can’t and/or won’t cancel or amend one CPA or another for not meeting performance metrics. The staffing numbers of one airplane or another isn’t UA’s problem.
United could take the EMBs and place them elsewhere if they chose to do so
They are the owners last time I checked
01-16-2018, 03:27 AM
#5400
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 2,145
I just did a N number search and Mesa owns about half of the Ejets, not United.
Another Mesa troll that is clueless.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
