1509v
04-25-2015, 08:05 AM
#22
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
The earnings call covered future 747 retirements ---
2 are being retired in 2015 but the rest of the fleet is now planned to fly until 2020. When they get to 2020, they'll reevaluate, as heavy checks will be due at that time.
From the earnings call, it sounds like the 2 being retired had reliability issues.
From the call:
Jeffrey Dastin - Thomson Reuters
How does the 747 fits into United’s fleet --planned fleet, retirement plan in 2015 and how do you only considered retiring a significant portion of 747s going forward?
John Rainey - CFO
The 747 is something that we do intend to keep for a few more years we have a couple coming out of our fleet in the near future but some of these we’ve made some improvements to the operating reliability of the aircraft and we could expect to keep them for another few years. They have another sort of big maintenance events in the 2020 time frame that that will be another decision point for us whether we want to extend them further at that point or go ahead and retire them.
If you look at United's cargo revenue, it increased 15.8% year over year. A lot of that's probably due to the Long Beach dock workers' strike, but is probably a factor in deciding to extend the life of the 747. With fuel prices down (after hedge losses/writedowns) more than 30%, the profitability numbers on the 747 are probably looking pretty good.
2 are being retired in 2015 but the rest of the fleet is now planned to fly until 2020. When they get to 2020, they'll reevaluate, as heavy checks will be due at that time.
From the earnings call, it sounds like the 2 being retired had reliability issues.
From the call:
Jeffrey Dastin - Thomson Reuters
How does the 747 fits into United’s fleet --planned fleet, retirement plan in 2015 and how do you only considered retiring a significant portion of 747s going forward?
John Rainey - CFO
The 747 is something that we do intend to keep for a few more years we have a couple coming out of our fleet in the near future but some of these we’ve made some improvements to the operating reliability of the aircraft and we could expect to keep them for another few years. They have another sort of big maintenance events in the 2020 time frame that that will be another decision point for us whether we want to extend them further at that point or go ahead and retire them.
If you look at United's cargo revenue, it increased 15.8% year over year. A lot of that's probably due to the Long Beach dock workers' strike, but is probably a factor in deciding to extend the life of the 747. With fuel prices down (after hedge losses/writedowns) more than 30%, the profitability numbers on the 747 are probably looking pretty good.
04-25-2015, 08:41 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
Maybe those hanging out on the 787 benefitted, but all in all the fences sucked for many on the CAL side. Instead of having a replacement for the LAX 747 pilots to fly out of LAX we saw a lot of those pilots go to other bases for an upgrade, or to be senior 777 FO's. Since most of the CA positions on the 787 are occupied by scabs, and even some of the FO positions, it seems we simply protected those who chose to cross a picket line. Bravo!!!
04-25-2015, 11:32 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
The company has figured out the costs of not having pilots/too many pilots/retraining pilots and they just work to optimize that. We can rationalize it all we want because its disruptive to our lives.
We've been doing it that way here for the 19+ years I've been here. I've been displaced 7 times (All in my 1st 8 years) here. Three of them were being displaced as a Captain (727, Airbus, Guppy) so it happens.
I'm hoping the surplus is small and mostly volunteers. At least one friend of mine was saved on the last bump in IAH because someone senior volunteered. No one wants the disruption. None of the guys getting bumped deserves it either.
It a business decision by the company.
04-25-2015, 01:13 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 166
I'm hoping to be based in IAH as soon as possible. I know the quickest way is the 320. As a newhire, will I then be displaced out of IAH on the 320 after the 737 displacements begin or do there have to be 320 vacancies in order for the 737 guys to remain in IAH on the Bus?
Hope what I'm asking makes sense? Just hate to end up getting a crashpad/car/etc in IAH and then be displaced out of the base right away. I do understand seniority rules though and respect that.
Hope what I'm asking makes sense? Just hate to end up getting a crashpad/car/etc in IAH and then be displaced out of the base right away. I do understand seniority rules though and respect that.
04-25-2015, 01:18 PM
#26
Stuck Mic
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
Someone with more knowledge than me will chime in for you but I believe in a displacement, those folks getting displaced can bump into any category their seniority can hold.
So yes, they could take Airbus slots being senior to you
So yes, they could take Airbus slots being senior to you
04-25-2015, 01:29 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Yes they can bump to any category their seniority can hold. A more senior person can voluntarily bump but they use the seniority on a one for one basis of those being displaced.
04-25-2015, 01:34 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 166
So if I understand correctly, there doesn't have to be any vacancies? They can bump anyone junior to them out of the 320 in IAH if they want to stay in IAH?
Last edited by UAL97; 04-25-2015 at 01:45 PM.
04-25-2015, 01:36 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Maybe those hanging out on the 787 benefitted, but all in all the fences sucked for many on the CAL side. Instead of having a replacement for the LAX 747 pilots to fly out of LAX we saw a lot of those pilots go to other bases for an upgrade, or to be senior 777 FO's. Since most of the CA positions on the 787 are occupied by scabs, and even some of the FO positions, it seems we simply protected those who chose to cross a picket line. Bravo!!!
Yes, scabs should never have a refuge.
04-25-2015, 01:45 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
