New MCO/TPA and LAS 737 Bases Annoucned
12-02-2022, 08:43 PM
#82
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2021
Posts: 86
Given that pilots are a finite supply at the moment, we do not have the option to simply add bodies at will. Taking away, rollable days off while obviously has quality of life benefits for our reserves, would be a giant manpower negative move… This would force the company to take the December (reserve staffing) approach for most of the year, by pushing on the G line and keeping more pilots on reserve with much higher line values for line holders. I’m not saying there’s right answer, but it’s a zero sum game.
The only reserve rules that matter to the company, are those for narrowbody captains. They can put new hires into widebody reserve, and at this point, there is no shortage of people ready to bid widebody captain reserve. So give him the companies desire to grow aggressively, and the fact that there is a limited supply of pilots in the ecosystem right now, if you reduce a reserve’s obligation to the company, thus increasing their quality of life, you are going to make life more miserable for most line holders. The fact that people come on here and pretend this isn’t the reality is a little silly.
December was a clear example that it’s a zero sum game. Pick your poison.
The only reserve rules that matter to the company, are those for narrowbody captains. They can put new hires into widebody reserve, and at this point, there is no shortage of people ready to bid widebody captain reserve. So give him the companies desire to grow aggressively, and the fact that there is a limited supply of pilots in the ecosystem right now, if you reduce a reserve’s obligation to the company, thus increasing their quality of life, you are going to make life more miserable for most line holders. The fact that people come on here and pretend this isn’t the reality is a little silly.
December was a clear example that it’s a zero sum game. Pick your poison.
Or…ya know….make strong gains in work rules. The fact the company can modify the G-line at will, no limit on SC conversions….all needs to be fixed along with rolling days off and global
12-02-2022, 10:01 PM
#83
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2022
Position: Power Isosceles
Posts: 119
12-04-2022, 05:36 AM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: B-737
Posts: 105
12-04-2022, 06:45 AM
#86
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2020
Posts: 95
Okay, someone tell me where I'm wrong.
If we get all the NB (737 Max) that we are scheduled to, they will need to be crewed, maintained, flown, and parked every evening.
With that in mind, do we have enough parking at our current domiciles for that? I'm a Bus F/O in EWR and know we are gate, runway, and parking limited there already.
From what I've seen in IAD, IAH, ORD the same limits apply to varying degrees.
With the above in play it would appear to me that looking at UALs current domestic route structure, you just can't increase frequencies enough (thicken the lines on the map) but will need both new routes and new domiciles to absorb all the new metal. The current plan for LAS / MCO hubs will alleviate some system stress in the short term, but as staffing and jets arrive it won't be enough as currently envisioned / announced.
Now looking at BOS as a domicile would most likely mean thin international (some 767, 757, but most likely A321 type flying) but it's runway / parking constrained.
I could see DEN growing more than has been talked about. Could we be looking at increasing flying in the SE US, or to Latin America? How about setting up domiciles in your enemies domiciles because you have out hired, out bought, and outgrown his ability to fight you?
SK seems to stay one or three steps ahead...
Comments welcome.
If we get all the NB (737 Max) that we are scheduled to, they will need to be crewed, maintained, flown, and parked every evening.
With that in mind, do we have enough parking at our current domiciles for that? I'm a Bus F/O in EWR and know we are gate, runway, and parking limited there already.
From what I've seen in IAD, IAH, ORD the same limits apply to varying degrees.
With the above in play it would appear to me that looking at UALs current domestic route structure, you just can't increase frequencies enough (thicken the lines on the map) but will need both new routes and new domiciles to absorb all the new metal. The current plan for LAS / MCO hubs will alleviate some system stress in the short term, but as staffing and jets arrive it won't be enough as currently envisioned / announced.
Now looking at BOS as a domicile would most likely mean thin international (some 767, 757, but most likely A321 type flying) but it's runway / parking constrained.
I could see DEN growing more than has been talked about. Could we be looking at increasing flying in the SE US, or to Latin America? How about setting up domiciles in your enemies domiciles because you have out hired, out bought, and outgrown his ability to fight you?
SK seems to stay one or three steps ahead...
Comments welcome.
12-04-2022, 06:49 AM
#87
line slug
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Position: B777 Captain
Posts: 220
12-04-2022, 06:55 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Posts: 181
Okay, someone tell me where I'm wrong.
If we get all the NB (737 Max) that we are scheduled to, they will need to be crewed, maintained, flown, and parked every evening.
With that in mind, do we have enough parking at our current domiciles for that? I'm a Bus F/O in EWR and know we are gate, runway, and parking limited there already.
From what I've seen in IAD, IAH, ORD the same limits apply to varying degrees.
With the above in play it would appear to me that looking at UALs current domestic route structure, you just can't increase frequencies enough (thicken the lines on the map) but will need both new routes and new domiciles to absorb all the new metal. The current plan for LAS / MCO hubs will alleviate some system stress in the short term, but as staffing and jets arrive it won't be enough as currently envisioned / announced.
Now looking at BOS as a domicile would most likely mean thin international (some 767, 757, but most likely A321 type flying) but it's runway / parking constrained.
I could see DEN growing more than has been talked about. Could we be looking at increasing flying in the SE US, or to Latin America? How about setting up domiciles in your enemies domiciles because you have out hired, out bought, and outgrown his ability to fight you?
SK seems to stay one or three steps ahead...
Comments welcome.
If we get all the NB (737 Max) that we are scheduled to, they will need to be crewed, maintained, flown, and parked every evening.
With that in mind, do we have enough parking at our current domiciles for that? I'm a Bus F/O in EWR and know we are gate, runway, and parking limited there already.
From what I've seen in IAD, IAH, ORD the same limits apply to varying degrees.
With the above in play it would appear to me that looking at UALs current domestic route structure, you just can't increase frequencies enough (thicken the lines on the map) but will need both new routes and new domiciles to absorb all the new metal. The current plan for LAS / MCO hubs will alleviate some system stress in the short term, but as staffing and jets arrive it won't be enough as currently envisioned / announced.
Now looking at BOS as a domicile would most likely mean thin international (some 767, 757, but most likely A321 type flying) but it's runway / parking constrained.
I could see DEN growing more than has been talked about. Could we be looking at increasing flying in the SE US, or to Latin America? How about setting up domiciles in your enemies domiciles because you have out hired, out bought, and outgrown his ability to fight you?
SK seems to stay one or three steps ahead...
Comments welcome.
12-04-2022, 07:15 AM
#89
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2020
Posts: 95
Where do those 120 jets get parked if not at new destinations and serving new hubs? I think we are about to go on the offensive domestically...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
