United and Continental start cross-fleeting

Aren't those UA flight attendants forgetting that with the loss of some UA European flights out of IAD to CO metal, there are CO flights out of EWR switching to UA metal, which means those FAs would just start working some flights out of EWR instead of IAD? I see the downsides to some customers (mostly elites in economy class) out of IAD, but it's not like the FAs you heard discussing this aren't going to have opportunities to work UA flights to Europe out of EWR until the integration is complete.

This just reinforces the notion that airlines will do anything to save one penny, literally. Airline management on employee morale (especially flight attendant morale): "who cares."

You say: "why they would do this is beyond me." Again, in the blog post you answer you own question: to save a (minimal) amount of money.

Airline management doesn't give a hoot about FA morale.

Are you sure about the IADCDG dates? KVS/Sabre is showing the 777 continuing through the end of the summer season with the addition of a second sector on a CO 757 (UA3844, 2145-1125+1). From what I can see, the schedule is loaded for 2x IAD-CDG until the fall with 1 777 and 1 757, then the 777 goes away after Sep 28.

What about the whole first class issue, or lack there of on CO?

What annoys me most is CO's obsession with 757s on Europe routes. As someone who is a predominantly coach flier, the notion of sitting in row 25 on a 757 for 6+ hours is absolutely horrifying.

I have flown on CO more than I have on UA, and CO's staff was always far superior in terms of morale and they always seem like they genuinely enjoy their work. I hope that that sticks around after the merger with UA is complete, but I have my doubts.

Here's the prima facie case for cross fleeting:

UAL B772 (12/45/194) to COA B752 (16/159) is not anywhere close to "a dozen seats" adjustment. It's a dozen seats in first alone, plus two and a half dozen in business plus three dozen in coach. Sounds like UAL was sending way too much capacity to those SkyTeam hubs due to equipment constraints.

OTOH both ZRH and BRU probably have a lot of premium cabin demand from NYC due to finance and government traffic, so it makes sense to upgrade them and grab more of those front-cabin dollars.

I don't see the reason for consternation with the crew. Nobody's planes are going to the desert, they're just moving 200 miles up/down the coast. It's not like UAL has widebody qualified FA's ready to go in EWR; it will probably be your same TPA friends just commuting to EWR instead of IAD.

For elites it's definitely a reduction in service quality and consistency: already applied upgrades lost and no SWU usage and mileage upgrades through *A (full fare only) mechanisms. I had a similar issue with domestic cross fleeting (well, mostly just UAL canceling their flights and dumping everyone on existing COA flights) where I lost a confirmed upgrade and due to ticket sync issues I had no shot at EUA or day-of upgrades. I wrote UAL an email about it, recognizing the automation/system issues but suggesting more manual/agent flexibility; the response was "sorry" + $200 ecert rather than addressing the issue.

My ex is a CO FA and she was telling me a story about UA & CO pilots getting into a fist fight in the crew lounge of a Paris hotel. She also said CO is going to start DEN-FLL and DEN-LAS service. I agree crossing crew bases may not be a good idea, unless UAL is trying to pit the employees against each other as some sort of strange negotiation tactic.

Hmm, that took me so long to compose a couple other people posted.

What's the aversion to B752 TATL flying? The hard product is the same (minus E+ for a few years), the cabin is just as big as the 747 UD (minus the window boxes), the lav ratio is the same (within a handful of pax per lav), and the block times are nearly the same (+10 min).

>>United employees wants an “absolute” seniority list, meaning seniority is determined by hire date. Continental employees want a “relative” seniority list, which would mean that a flight attendant that has been at Continental longer than a counterpart at United could end up more senior.

If a CO FA has been at CO longer than a UA FA has been at UA, wouldn't that imply that the CO FA's hire date was before that of the UA FA? So your example of relative vs. absolute still seems to come back to hire date. Am I missing something here? (Did you write this as you got off a red-eye? 🙂

Re: absolute vs relative seniority lists- Isn't this just US Airways all over again?

If they are going to start cross-fleeting, why not just start allowing SWU/mileage upgrade use on either airline? I mean it's a change that is going to have to be made at some point, why not just make it now? It's better than alienating elites...(particularly CO elites in EWR who have a host of other places to take their loyalty if they get pissed at CO).

I also think you may be too optimistic if you are thinking the morale will improve greatly once these issues are settled. The issues may get settled but there will be losers and some of the losers certainly will not be happy.

The bottom line is that the airline industry is a top place to work.

i will stop flying iad-ams then. no e+ - no go.
i will miss vino volo though.

This may be a dumb question, but will, for example, the CO 757 on IAD-CDG be shown as "operated by Continental" on .bomb, etc? Or will we only know if E+ doesn't show up, for example, whether it's aUA or CO bird?

I'll choose another carrier before I subject myself to E- in a 757 TATL. Same size as 747 UD? OK, but that's Business class. I just refuse to do a narrow boday TATL unless no other choice. I'd feel way too cramped only having one aisle, for example. Even if it is just a psychological thing, 757 just doesn't feel right for an overseas international trip. Plus I didn't stay loyal and earn status on UA just to not even have a choice of E+ on a TATL flight!

Great post but Lucky really didn't explain the seniority issue that well. There are two ways to do it:

1) Lucky explained this correctly. Simply take date of hire and mash the FAs together. Period. This is way it should be done, in my opinion.

2) Take UAs most senior FA and he/she is #1. Take COs most senior FA and he/she is #2. Take UAs second most senior FA and he/she is #3. Take COs second most senior FA and he/she is #4...and so and so forth. Since CO has more junior FAs (they did a bunch of hiring out of EWR in the past 10 years to accommodate growth), more junior CO FAs may end up in front of more senior UA FAs (which is unfair, in my book).

It seems to me, based on what you have written, that the UA/CO situation with regards to seniority of flight attendants (and flight captains as well, I'm thinking) is not much different than what happened with the US/AW merger. The same sort of problems about seniority arose there and still exist. It has caused a lot of hard feelings between the East crews and the West crews. Perhaps UA and CO can handle their merger a little better than US. It has not been a pretty picture.

How about those who purchased the annual E+ plan? Do they get refunds on IAD-CDG flghts operated by CO?

Upgrade instruments are another issue as many has mentioned.

I don't think CO and UA have identified all the issues that will impact the customers of both airlines. Do you have a customer feedback group that CO/UA consult on how the merger will impact customer flying patterns?

Clearly, I am not a happy camper as I am an IAD and Florida based flyer. I can see myself flying MIA-EWR-CDG or IAD/DCA-EWR-CDG starting in 2012 but not now.....lifetime miles don't count in CO flying at the moment.

The two IAD flights that are being converted to CO aircraft are IA-AMS & IAD-CDG which are poor decisions. Why they are downgrading service to Europe on IAD hub flights while doubling daily service is beyond me. I don't imagine that EWR-BRU is goung to be a big revenue generator anyways. EWR-ZRH might be a good route to increase capacity, but why doesn't UA take one of their domestic 767s and convert it to a 3 class 767? It can also do the same with some of its 2 class 777 fleet.

@Mark: "What’s the aversion to B752 TATL flying?"

3x3 seating on the 757 vs. 2x3x2 on the 767. Much lower odds of getting stuck in a middle seat on the 767, plus a couple flying together can get a pair of seats. Although changing, United's 777 with the 2x5x2 configuration is great for couples as well. Sometimes we fly coach, sometimes J class, so this would be a downgrade to us when we fly coach. We prefer the roomier feel of the widebodies as well. WIth all that said, I realize that cost wise the airlines have to do what they have to do, but instead of being exclusively United flyers we have already switched some flying to other carriers as the writing is on the wall.