UAL furloughs and CAL hiring.
04-19-2011, 05:16 PM
#191
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
kc135,
Broaden your sight picture a bit. Don't think 400. It will be viewed as a "premium" seat position as all top tier WB flying. Board doesn't know if the 400 will be around for 1 or 10 years. They also won't give credit to aircraft not on property. It's just the facts. New merger policy aside, they project forward based on a status quo of the types of aircraft/flying. Then attempt to balance the scales to ensure minimal divergence from what your progression could have been, in stasis, had time moved forward and the airlines size remained the same an no merger occurred. They will however make note of anything that pops up as an advantage to a degree such as significant disparity in retirements, etc. However, I don't believe those issues exist in this situation.
Board won't protect the "400", they'll attempt to protect a ratio of the WB opportunity vis-a-vis a fence. How tall and long will be seen in the future.
Frats,
Lee
Broaden your sight picture a bit. Don't think 400. It will be viewed as a "premium" seat position as all top tier WB flying. Board doesn't know if the 400 will be around for 1 or 10 years. They also won't give credit to aircraft not on property. It's just the facts. New merger policy aside, they project forward based on a status quo of the types of aircraft/flying. Then attempt to balance the scales to ensure minimal divergence from what your progression could have been, in stasis, had time moved forward and the airlines size remained the same an no merger occurred. They will however make note of anything that pops up as an advantage to a degree such as significant disparity in retirements, etc. However, I don't believe those issues exist in this situation.
Board won't protect the "400", they'll attempt to protect a ratio of the WB opportunity vis-a-vis a fence. How tall and long will be seen in the future.
Frats,
Lee
Your right, I guess I was trying to compare it to the attitude that not on property (pilots, not airplane)= zero career expectations. Just my opinion but it seems illogical to take only the short view on one while the long on another.
Best-
KC
04-19-2011, 05:34 PM
#192
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
They may know more than we think.
Jeff meets with IAH co-workers
In Jeff’s third CEO Exchange of the spring season, he gave a company and industry update at IAH on Tuesday and talked about the volatile price of jet fuel and its effect on the company. Jeff also talked about the differences in the CO and UA fleets and said, “We’ll need to refresh our fleet over time.” He also confirmed that the new United will continue flying Airbus aircraft.
“We look forward to the delivery of the Airbus A350XWB, scheduled for 2016,” said Jeff. “These fuel-efficient widebodies will take the place of our fleet of Boeing 747-400 aircraft over time.”
In Jeff’s third CEO Exchange of the spring season, he gave a company and industry update at IAH on Tuesday and talked about the volatile price of jet fuel and its effect on the company. Jeff also talked about the differences in the CO and UA fleets and said, “We’ll need to refresh our fleet over time.” He also confirmed that the new United will continue flying Airbus aircraft.
“We look forward to the delivery of the Airbus A350XWB, scheduled for 2016,” said Jeff. “These fuel-efficient widebodies will take the place of our fleet of Boeing 747-400 aircraft over time.”
Last edited by APC225; 04-19-2011 at 05:45 PM.
04-19-2011, 06:47 PM
#193
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
APC, this is not new. Here is the press release from Dec 09....
United Airlines is ordering 50 new airplanes the way some people ease into a cold lake. Toes first, and very slowly.
The deal announced Tuesday has several conservative pieces. United split its order between the Boeing 787 and the Airbus A350, and waited until the depth of a recession so it could press for better prices. No planes will be delivered until 2016, and United has extensive rights to defer the orders. Perhaps most importantly, United only has to come up with $152 million over the next five years, putting off the day it will need to line up loans for its new planes.
At list prices the new jets would be worth more than $10 billion, with about $4 billion for Boeing's 787-8 and around $6 billion for the Airbus planes. United President John Tague said the carrier got a discount, which is common for jet orders, though he didn't specify how much.
"We felt that we had a significant opportunity by timing the order with the backdrop of the current economic environment," he said.
The planes will replace Boeing 747 and 767s. Deliveries are expected between 2016 and 2019.
United Airlines is ordering 50 new airplanes the way some people ease into a cold lake. Toes first, and very slowly.
The deal announced Tuesday has several conservative pieces. United split its order between the Boeing 787 and the Airbus A350, and waited until the depth of a recession so it could press for better prices. No planes will be delivered until 2016, and United has extensive rights to defer the orders. Perhaps most importantly, United only has to come up with $152 million over the next five years, putting off the day it will need to line up loans for its new planes.
At list prices the new jets would be worth more than $10 billion, with about $4 billion for Boeing's 787-8 and around $6 billion for the Airbus planes. United President John Tague said the carrier got a discount, which is common for jet orders, though he didn't specify how much.
"We felt that we had a significant opportunity by timing the order with the backdrop of the current economic environment," he said.
The planes will replace Boeing 747 and 767s. Deliveries are expected between 2016 and 2019.
04-20-2011, 07:42 AM
#195
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,905
04-22-2011, 03:26 PM
#196
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Talk about a windfall!
04-22-2011, 07:30 PM
#197
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
apc225,
Agree completely with your position. Then that nasty premise that the board can't read the future and will have to find some position in time to set a baseline will prevail.
Can't remember, was that 2016 in the post????
I can only hope the topic won't even be on the table having a JCBA and SLI long done prior to 2016.
That means, snapshot. Assumption, orders are just that, aircraft on property are that. We have x percentage of WB's at each and y percentage of NB's at each. That dictates the career possibilities for the combined group "as of this moment" assuming status quo to infinity.
Their opening comments on the decision will cite ALPA merger policy as their guidance, will state the common law aspect of "fair and equitable", and they will lay out their reasoning based on those guidelines for the final answer.
Future orders do not weigh in on this.
An ordered aircraft is just that until you are sitting in the seat getting IOE. At that time it becomes a figure for consideration.
Frats,
Lee
Agree completely with your position. Then that nasty premise that the board can't read the future and will have to find some position in time to set a baseline will prevail.
Can't remember, was that 2016 in the post????
I can only hope the topic won't even be on the table having a JCBA and SLI long done prior to 2016.
That means, snapshot. Assumption, orders are just that, aircraft on property are that. We have x percentage of WB's at each and y percentage of NB's at each. That dictates the career possibilities for the combined group "as of this moment" assuming status quo to infinity.
Their opening comments on the decision will cite ALPA merger policy as their guidance, will state the common law aspect of "fair and equitable", and they will lay out their reasoning based on those guidelines for the final answer.
Future orders do not weigh in on this.
An ordered aircraft is just that until you are sitting in the seat getting IOE. At that time it becomes a figure for consideration.
Frats,
Lee
04-22-2011, 07:46 PM
#198
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
No issues with me. You know my position on UAL, I walked.
Having said that, the new merger policy opens up all kinds of inroads into arguments during the SLI from both sides.
The value and weight placed on longevity is yet to be seen and will be interesting to watch when that time comes.
Assume nothing at this point. The overriding common law "fair and equitable" will run hand in hand with the arbitration board attempting to live up to the merger guidelines (that have no precedent to fall back on).
Whenever that decision finally happens, you'll know the result of the change in policy. How well the arbitration board did trying to achieve those guidelines will of course be open to interpretation.
Until then, all is speculation. Neither "attitude" will be the end reality IMO.
Take care.
Lee
05-05-2011, 12:56 PM
#199
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 430
No matter how the SLI goes we are ALL going to probably be much better off than we are now if we accept nothing less than an industry leading contract. Focus on the Contract and accept nothing substandard. Then we can move on and worry about the SLI (which we won't have an individual say in anyways).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
