01110011

Won’t blame them for trying ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. It’s the company’s job to minimize cost while achieving whatever morale/staffing goals they’re shooting, it’s the unions job to beat them over the head with reality. I would’ve pulled the trigger too if the union seemed happy with it.

What they’re not doing is antagonizing us or trying to draw things out. The key change is they know they need us on board if they want to achieve their goals. I won’t blame them for trying to do it as cheaply as possible the first time around.

Sixty N Two

I will, a good business deal is win win, screwing over a business partner and “sticking it to them” is just bad business any way you slice it. This was amateur hour on both sides of the Negotiations table. Both sides 100 percent out of touch

eagleatr

I don't blame the company for this. If the NC said it was all acceptable to the union, why should the company care? They're not going to spend money they don't have to.

SwampFoxx

That’s perfectly fine if you want to look at it that way. But actions speak louder than words so keep in mind what the company thinks about you when they’re offering koolaid classes about how valuable an asset you are and how much they need you to buy into a common goal.

01110011

Imo the action was “we gave the NC what they asked for”. There is a limit to how much they “value” us.

I have a guy that sharpens my kitchen knives. He does a great job at a really, really good price. When I get my knives back, I toss in a little extra on top. I don’t give him double what he charges me. If he doubled his rates, I’d probably still go to him. Doesn’t mean I don’t currently appreciate or value his work, but I’m not going to spend more of my own money when he’s happy doing the work at the agreed upon rate. The NC asked, the company gave. For now I’m more disappointed in the union, both for the TA and the shenanigans most of the reps are pulling to stay in their jobs instead of resigning with some dignity and clearing the way for a new deal. When the current cast of characters at the company tries to actively screw me over I’ll feel the same way, for now I don’t feel like that’s happening.

Everyone is going to view this from a different lens, I’m not saying you’re wrong for seeing it your way.

AxlF16

The answer is ZERO. United hasn't taken an aggressive position or strategy in the 25+ years I've been here.

NotMrNiceGuy

I thought they used to have a goal of 20,000 pilots when Oscar was there. By 2020? Am I misremembering that?

AxlF16

I never heard that from Munoz. The biggest talk I ever heard prior to Kirby was pre-911...and it was more like 15000. For context, my new hire seniority number was 8858 in 1997 (UAL). By 911 we had gotten a bit over 11000 IIRC.

NotMrNiceGuy

It might have been the crooked guy before Munoz (can’t remember his name). For some reason 20,000 sticks out. Might’ve been AA, but I thought it was UAL for some reason.

KnightNight

Seniority is over 15000 now, with 138 deliveries next year and 350 for 2024 (obviously not all growth but even at a 1/4 growth that’s huge numbers. You’re adding 2000 odd pilots if that’s a quarter growth. Now we just need the music to keep playing. Despite economic indications I am optimistic, it’s a rush to get as many pilots as possible before the regionals implode. It’s about 2025 at this point, not end of this year. I think we will have TA2 in short order to accommodate the training needs