Ual-uax Rj Scope

BlueRidger

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2001
Posts
103
Total Time
5000+
I was curious if anyone new the status of the UAL-UAX RJ scope arbitration? I was under the ompression that it was supposed to occur somewhere around the 15th of March. What are the two sides actually offering?.. I know this starts another ugly scope discussion but ACA is currently holding our transition and upgrade traing schedules hostage to this. They will not let us bid for classes until United tells them how many RJ's they can operate.

Ready, Aim,.............. Fire
 

surplus1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Posts
5,649
Total Time
25K+
BlueRidger,

I don't know the current status of the UAL grievance but if they prevail, it is not likely that you'll be getting that training anytime soon. If the Delta pilots also prevail with their grievance, then there is a high probablity that you will be on the streets.

The sad part is that if they win, it is not likely that any of them will be recalled because of it. Just my .02
 

Marko Ramius

Vilnius Nastavnic
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
378
Total Time
25 w/L
Blueridger,

No one knows for sure, but I can tell you this: as far as the UA stuff goes don't believe surplus1's comments. If we were going to force UAX to park their SJ's, we would have started the process already. ALPA has been free to do so since Mar 1, but has not because they plan to settle it in the upcoming "economic recovery package,"(read concessions) negotiations. In other words, UA's MEC is looking to negotiate on this, not enforce the law of the contract. While your growth might not end up being as fast as pre 9/11(whose is?), I don't think you'll see a reduction in your UAX flying in the near term(2003) future. If anybody takes a hit, it will likely be Air Wisconsin or Skywest. If it comes down to limiting the total number of UAX SJ's, ACA has the most to spread around the system. They have the flexibility to cover IAD, ORD, and DEN(with a little work) in the UA system. Skywest and AW would have to ramp up considerably to do so. With Ansett II going out of business, UA will have to take the A320 deliveries that were previously deffered and heading to Australia. That would put the mainline narrowbody fleet between 30-40 a/c short of what the contract requires, so a new SJ will probably come out based on that with an agreed upon timetable to bring the fleet back up to 451 narrowbodies. Surplus was right about one thing though, it's unlikely that any of us at UA will get our jobs back anytime soon-irregardless of whether or not ALPA decides to negotiate our scope away.
 

Gulfstream777

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Posts
15
Total Time
2000+
both sides

I can agree to both sides of this past posting. But when it comes down to it, the scope will fail in the interest of $$$. No matter how much UAL pilots do not want the RJ's, the $$ will choose the victor. Let's face it ACA can fly the routes a lot cheaper than what it will take to pay a A320/737 driver to do so. I am not saying either way is the correct way to do business but in the end UAL no matter the contract will settle with ACA for the simple cost and aircraft availability. I think it will be the difference between pre 9/11 and post..

Comments???

GULF
 

Rooster

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2002
Posts
7
Total Time
12000
The funny thing about this whole scope issue is this. If United couldn't make money on the shuttle routes, will they ever be able to? Will United ever be able to go back and make money on those routes? Not likely with the increasing costs of labor. So, do they just trash can the routes or let the Express carriers do them with RJs? Seems to me the mainline employees would not be willing to take the significant concessions to make those routes profitable. So, I think the scope issue will be a matter of negotiations. RJs are already flying the routes and will fly more of them, but at what cost to United management.
 
Top