UA AND US Merger Talks

[700UW]

There would be serious union issues:

US Pilots USAPA / UA Pilots ALPA

US A&P IAM / UA A&P IBT

US CSA CWA / UA CSA IAM


FAs are both AFA and Ramp are both IAM< but UA outsources much more mtc work than US does, it would be a nightmare merger.

 

[Poug Darker]

Amen...remember there is more to these airlines than just pilots & fa's....

I truly detest seeing anyone lose employment during a merger, but the big difference between pilots & f/a's and the 'rest of the airline' is that non-flight crew can 'lateral' into another company (in a decent economy, I know....) but flight crew start over again at the bottom, both seniority and pay-wise.
Best of luck to us all.

 

[TWskyliner]

WOW!!! Proves the point I made in my last post. Real AArogance.

See what we've been deAAling with for 8 years? Good luck to you all ..do unto others....and all that jazz.

 

[US Oringinal]

I truly detest seeing anyone lose employment during a merger, but the big difference between pilots & f/a's and the 'rest of the airline' is that non-flight crew can 'lateral' into another company (in a decent economy, I know....) but flight crew start over again at the bottom, both seniority and pay-wise.
Best of luck to us all.

HUH????
Been thru 4 mergers...never started again at the bottom....luckily have always gotten DOH seniority and pay....

 

[USFlyer]

I truly detest seeing anyone lose employment during a merger, but the big difference between pilots & f/a's and the 'rest of the airline' is that non-flight crew can 'lateral' into another company (in a decent economy, I know....) but flight crew start over again at the bottom, both seniority and pay-wise.
Best of luck to us all.

First, don't assume it's so easy to find a lateral job. I know many who worked in Crystal City who took downgrades, pay cuts and the like when that office was closed several years ago.

Second, the reason one 'starts over' is due to the negotiated contracts. There's no reason why "total service time" at all carriers cannot be taken into account when determining pay. Seniority I can understand (for scheduling and the like), but hiring a pilot with 20 yrs of experience should cost most than hiring a pilot with 2 yrs of experience.

It's never a good thing when you're tied to one company, effectively for life, as the only means to increase your pay. It puts you in a very, very tough spot and is one of the primary reasons so many concessionary contracts passed in the first place.

All that being said, I really don't have any ideas how to solve this problem. That's for someone in a higher pay grade to figure out.

 

[freedom]

i hope we merge ...

by my guesstimates us airways alone would only last until the first half of next year .... combined with UNITED , well shucks i'm betting we'd be around for at least another 2 years minimum ...

 

[Bear96]

UA made the decision to abandon NY in the past decade. Remember that they had a decent intl. operation, with feeding traffic, to LHR, HKG, NRT and EZE among others.

???

What domestic "feeding traffic" did UA have into JFK to connect to LHR / HKG / NRT / EZE / etc.?

 

[hp_fa]

When Sully and Jeff landed in the Hudson, USAPA responded expertly....without your dues. When USAPA dealt with fuel school, they also did it without your dues.

Reed,

IMO, the first one is yes but not the second. The reasons for me feeling that way about the fuel school issue has been discussed here many times and I won't open it again except to say I disagree.

Fly safe.

 

[Bear96]

These negotiations are all about UA getting CLT.

Seriously?

With a well-established IAD hub only an hour up the road, and with its much higher O/D traffic and recession-proof government business?

 

[ual777fan]

???

What domestic "feeding traffic" did UA have into JFK to connect to LHR / HKG / NRT / EZE / etc.?

Not much. If memory serves there was Express service from IAD, and mainline service from ORD and DEN as well as the usually transcontinental service from SFO and LAX. And that's about it. But, it's not like AA has had a ton of international feed at JFK over the years. They've been able to run a large international operation out of JFK, largely based on O&D traffic.

 

[767jetz]

Here we go again. I really think US-UA need to complete this merger and divest most of the DCA slots to AA, keeping enough to run the Shuttle and flights to the hubs. US cannot let UA-CO merge. They will be way too small to compete with a combined UA-CO and DL-NW.

What makes you think US is in a position to "let" or not "let" anything happen? They can't even finish their first merger... how many years later? Certainly not a position of power.

Has anyone stopped to consider that just because one news article was released and taken up by the AP, doesn't mean it is based on fact or reality? And despite the emotions behind this, doesn't anyone ever give anything the sniff test or check for common sense before jumping on the merger bandwagon? How many times have we been through this? Don't you guys EVER learn from the past?

Check back in a month or so and see if there is any official announcement. That will be your one and only indication that this story is real or speculation.

 

[ggiby]

Seriously?

With a well-established IAD hub only an hour up the road, and with its much higher O/D traffic and recession-proof government business?

HuH???? Clt is at least seven hours down the road....... are you confusing IAD and DCA????

 

[767jetz]

My bets are on UA-CO. The glaring hole in UA's network is NY. US is abandoning LGA. I personally think that Mr. Parker is getting a bit desperate. CO has been in the process of relocating its operations at UA hubs and joint teams of UA and CO managers have been working to streamline processes. Furthermore, CO is part of the ATI with AC, and LH. US is not. A UA-US combination will not achieve maximization of scope. A CO-UA combination will.

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble before this thread reaches 1000 pages, but here is a clip from the UAL ALPA MEC:

"The New York Times this afternoon published a story that reports that “UAL Corporation, the parent of United Airlines, and US Airways are in talks to merge.” The story went on to say that United and US Airways “are deep in their merger discussions, though a transaction is not expected to be announced for at least several weeks.”

The United Master Executive Council has confirmed that this report is speculation. While talks could develop at some future date, with US Airways or any other carrier, presently there are no meaningful merger discussions with US Airways. "

it goes on to say:

"We are opposed to any merger that is not beneficial to the careers and the long-term future of United pilots. We vehemently oppose any merger that would not lead to a stronger and viable United Airlines."

You can take this to mean that UA pilots are not interested in US Airways and IMO we would shut the place down even to the point of Chapter 7 than allow a slow and painful death as the one US Airways is suffering. The only merger that would gain support of labor at UA and have any chance of mutual success is one with CO, and only if it is structured similar to the DL/NW merger.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Seriously?

With a well-established IAD hub only an hour up the road, and with its much higher O/D traffic and recession-proof government business?

No, not seriously. My post followed one calling for HQ to be in CLT.

 

[PHLfa88]

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble before this thread reaches 1000 pages, but here is a clip from the UAL ALPA MEC:

"The New York Times this afternoon published a story that reports that “UAL Corporation, the parent of United Airlines, and US Airways are in talks to merge.” The story went on to say that United and US Airways “are deep in their merger discussions, though a transaction is not expected to be announced for at least several weeks.”

The United Master Executive Council has confirmed that this report is speculation. While talks could develop at some future date, with US Airways or any other carrier, presently there are no meaningful merger discussions with US Airways. "

it goes on to say:

"We are opposed to any merger that is not beneficial to the careers and the long-term future of United pilots. We vehemently oppose any merger that would not lead to a stronger and viable United Airlines."

You can take this to mean that UA pilots are not interested in US Airways and IMO we would shut the place down even to the point of Chapter 7 than allow a slow and painful death as the one US Airways is suffering. The only merger that would gain support of labor at UA and have any chance of mutual success is one with CO, and only if it is structured similar to the DL/NW merger.

UA Pilots are just Blowing smoke!! What do you Think they would say?