pilotgolfer

They should backfill the open spots. You have to look at the Min-max numbers the company puts out with the bid announcement. The Min was 68 with a max of 85 (85 was the current # of active FOs). If 20 FOs on the fleet bid out, leaving the active count at 65... They would have to backfill at least 3 to stay at the min..or they could backfill up to 20.

I think this is how it works. Someone more familiar with the process may have a better understanding.

catIIIc

With the BAT who knows what the company will do. They just forced 40 guys over to the 76T in IAH now they have 40 vacancies on the 756. Go figure.. Just bid it and see what happens. I was going to go to the 76T because I was more senior but now with the new vacancies I am going to stay put.

sleeves

Cal did not grow to take this flying. There was no collusion. Just old classics getting parked. Cal parked all the 300's and most of the 500's at the same time. This thinking is on par with the Cal guys saying that the arbs were paid off. Ridiculous, that is where the dots connect.

oldmako

Right.

Why would a global airline with a large fleet of WBs park 104 NB airframes literally overnight with ZERO plan for replacing them, other than another airlines planes?The big money comes from the big planes but ONLY when they're full. And please don't tell me because of RJs, because the numbers (before and after) simply don't support that position. Those hunks of crap were already flying, and flying full. UAL+CAL simply had too many narrow bodies and overlap. Plus, the Justice Department (Anti-trust) would have shot it down.

All this, and especially at a time when we had record load factors and the fleet was largely paid for.

I'm sorry that I took the bait.

Airhoss

Between the super senior widebody pilots, the high number of commuters, the limited arrival capacity, and the weather. SFO can be a major PITA to commute to. Especially on a Jr NB schedule.

Being senior on a WB is a different story.

jsled

I disagree Sleeves. CAL and USA had plenty of narrowbodies. Tilton was gonna merge with one or the other...as he stated over and over again. Not that it matters, I am happy with the way it turned out.

Sled

socalflyboy

So, the Skywest cats flying your old guppy routes at a fourth of the cost does not figure into this equation??? Ual sold out their SCOPE for that big ol dollar contract 2K...I will never bow down to " we parked our guppies for the merger"... The guppies were parked for the high dollar contract, the sale of your scope...

Blockoutblockin

LMAO, who cares about goose abuse! Not a surgeon.

jsled

And I'll never bow to "you sold your scope!" First of all, we folded on scope (from 50 to 70 seats) in 2003, about the same time we took double digit pay cuts and were about to lose our pension. So much for selling scope for the "high dollar contract". But hey, it sounds good.

Second of all, this is what the GF means about the numbers not adding up.....

From United's 10K filings:

31 DEC 2007....460 mainline/279 regionals
31 DEC 2008....409 mainline/280 regionals
31 DEC 2009....360 mainline/292 regionals

United Continental Holdings, Inc. - Investor Relations - Investor Relations

So 13 RJs replaced 100 guppies?? C-mon Man? Really?

Cal said no to the merger in April 2008, UAL had 460 Mainline AC.
Cal said yes to the merger in May 2010, UAL had 360 mainline AC...
And BOY those CAL guppies sure rolled into DEN, ORD, and LAX in a HURRY. But, no. It was all just a coincidence.

But like I said, it don't matter to me. Our furloughees didn't get stapled, so percentage wise, the SLI worked out great for me.

XHooker

Sled, look deeper into the numbers. CAL and UAL had similar reductions in domestic capacity. The difference is the reduction at UAL came primarily from mainline while the reduction at CAL came primarily from regionals. Flying at CAL didn't increase in 2008 and there are almost 150 pilots who can tell you that from personal experience. The only important thing to learn from all of that is Scope is the most important section in the contract.