Subject: Letter from MEC Chairman Captain Mark Bathurst
> June 21, 2006

> Dear Fellow Pilots:

> By now you have undoubtedly had the chance to see the “Frequently
> Asked Questions” that Flight Operations just published as a result of
> the recently conducted meetings in the seven domiciles and at TK.
> While each of us must ascribe our own degree of credibility to
> anything we read, it is ALPA’s strong opinion that many of the
> assertions in the FAQs are either misleading or simply not factual.
> Further, they cause us great trepidation about the degree of emphasis
> that Flight Operations places on issues such as morale, quality of
> life and the future of your relationship with management.

> ALPA has fought relentlessly for quality of life improvements in every
> contract, including trying to limit the damage foisted upon us under
> the guise of bankruptcy. Your MEC, without exception, constantly
> focuses on finding ways to improve our lives. Unfortunately, I’m not
> as optimistic regarding Flight Operations’ intentions. In the FAQs,
> several issues immediately caught our attention. While we could
> ostensibly make comments on each and every statement in the FAQs, we
> will only highlight those which we find to be the most egregious.
> Answers to FAQs we did not include here should be examined with the
> same degree of scrutiny as the following:

> The Company’s statements are in italics. Our response is in bold.

> · Are we properly staffed for the summer?

> The Company: We believe we are. Bear in mind that staffing levels for
> the summer have always been higher than for March and April, which had
> aggressive productivity targets that obviously didn’t work. For the
> most part, the month of May went very well and Senior/Junior manning
> was about one-third the level we saw in March. To date, June is on
> track.

> United MEC: ALPA cannot disagree with the above statement strongly
> enough. The Company apparently will accept a certain level of crew
> cancellations as a routine way of doing business. ALPA’s position is
> that crew cancellations should never be part of the Company’s normal
> planning process. The Company believes it is properly staffed with a
> concomitant high level of Junior/Senior manning built into the regular
> operation (witness the Company’s statement about May’s cancellation
> level, which is still at historic highs.) ALPA’s position is that
> eventually Junior/Senior manning will catch up to itself and
> significant crew cancellations will rear their ugly head once again.

> Your System Schedule Committee has been aggressive in voicing its
> concerns to management about adequate staffing for the summer. The SSC
> shared these concerns to all pilots in a letter sent last month.

> As a further indication of how the Company is really staffed, the TK
> 767 Fleet requested its PIs and Standards Captains to pick up open
> time for the weekend of June 10-11, 2006 due to shortages in both the
> captain and first officer seats. The following is the enote sent to
> all 767 PIs and Standards Captains:

> Gents,

> The crew desk called to advise the Fleet that they are critically
> short this weekend for both 767 Captains and F/O’s. If you can help
> please call the crew desk and pick up a trip…..they tell me that they
> are willing to split trips to accommodate your needs….1 day, 2 day, 3
> day, anything helps.

> Cheers,
>
> Assistant Chief Pilot, B737/757/767

>
> How can June be “on track” if we are resorting to extraordinary
> measures for the ordinary operation as witnessed by the above TK
> enote? Anyone want to venture a guess how summer thunderstorm
> recoveries will go?

> · Why are there so few trades available?

> The Company: Schedule flexibility is an explicit part of our manpower
> staffing model and it is first used to award PBS schedule values that
> average in the low 80s, a drop of almost 10 hours from the assumptions
> made in Contract 2003 negotiations. Next, schedule flexibility is
> used during Big Pick, as thousands of hours are dropped.

> This leaves little room for further drops during daily trip-trading.
> Setting trade-availables to zero across the board, in order to prevent
> additional trip drops, exposes the fundamental flaw in Unimatic
> trip-trading logic: All trip-drops are denied including those that
> are the first part of a drop/pick-up combination that may be
> beneficial to both the Company and the pilot. (Same-day trades are
> still permitted, but no one would point to that as schedule
> flexibility.) The web-based trip-trading system that is currently
> deployed at DCA corrects this flaw. However, further rollout of this
> system has been delayed. During the interim, we are looking into
> making changes to the Unimatic trip-trading logic so that zero
> trade-availables does not unnecessarily restrict drop/pick-up
> combinations.

> United MEC: So let me see if I understand this: “0” trades available,
> month after month, is NOW finally being looked at since the Company is
> at least a year behind in migrating to the web-based trip trading
> system? ALPA has been aggressively demanding more, not less,
> flexibility in the daily trip-trade system without increasing the
> number of reserves, and only now the Company says they are “looking
> into” it? Your System Schedule Committee, your MEC, and I have no
> idea why it has taken this long. It’s certainly not for our lack of
> trying.

> · What is the status of the web-based trip trade/vacation drop
> system?

> The Company: DCA pilots have been using the new system since the start
> of May, and having the system in a live environment has provided
> valuable feedback. The new system allows for pilot-to-pilot trades
> and automated vacation drops for line holders, and we’ve seen some
> positive results.

> United MEC: For all of you NOT based in DCA, talk to someone who is.
> Not only have there been access problems but, as in the problems
> experienced with the rollout of PBS, computer issues seem to have
> dominated the rollout of this program. Since the Company has refused
> to negotiate with ALPA concerning the web-based trip trading system,
> we can only address issues as they arise. We are not involved in the
> design or testing of this flawed system. There is no way to tell if
> it will ever be reliable or useable on a system-wide basis.

> · Are we planning to merge with another airline?

> The Company: United believes that consolidation will be necessary for
> the long-term health of the industry. We are working to ensure that
> United is in a position to make choices about its future that benefit
> United. Part of that is to focus on improving the competitiveness of
> our airline through better efficiencies, reduced costs and providing
> the right customer service while keeping safety our number one
> objective.

> United MEC: While no one doubts that consolidation may be on the
> horizon, timing is obviously the question. It seems that when Glenn
> Tilton appears in public, he mentions industry consolidation. I don’t
> know what steps Flight Operations has taken to prepare for it, but
> your MEC is well into its strategic planning. To that end, we will
> soon send out an excellent review from your MEC Merger Committee of
> all the issues we would face in any consolidation scenario. We are
> not aware of any discussions between airlines concerning mergers, but
> your MEC has wisely decided that it is critical to have all necessary
> resources immediately in place if required.

> · What are we doing to improve pilot morale?

> The Company: ALPA has been very effective in communicating to the
> Company the issues that are important to line pilots. For example,
> over the past two years ALPA negotiated changes that: reduce calls in
> the middle of the night, eliminate movable RDOs in the LCO, increase
> RDOs to 12 in the LCO and implement unlimited OMC. We will continue
> to be responsive to ALPA and work to find mutually beneficial
> solutions to other QWL issues. Naturally, we would expect morale to
> improve when United is in a position to be acquiring new aircraft and
> pilots can once again look forward to quicker advancement and more
> upward mobility.

> United MEC: This answer speaks volumes about Flight Operations’
> commitment (or lack thereof) to improving morale at United. Your MEC
> rejects out of hand that morale can’t improve until “…United is in a
> position to be acquiring new aircraft and pilots can once again look
> forward to quicker advancement and more upward mobility.”

> As I said at the beginning, not a day goes by that your MEC and MEC
> Committees don’t focus on improving your quality of work life as a
> United pilot. The Company’s FAQ correctly cites those areas where
> improvements have been made, but conveniently leaves out the fact that
> every one of those achievements was initiated by ALPA. Nowhere in our
> contract does it state that the Company can’t advance improvements on
> its own initiative.
>
>
>
> The clear implication to even the casual reader in the Company’s
> statement is that morale is stuck in the status quo until we grow.
> ALPA rejects this categorically. If we have to continue to be the
> catalyst for all improvements in your work life, so be it. We will
> continue to press quality of life improvements at every opportunity
> prior to the opening of formal Section 6 negotiations. There is no
> reason, other than pure intransigence, that the Company cannot
> initiate nor pursue improvements to your lifestyle.
>
>
>
> · What are we doing to ensure CS complies with OMC issues?
>
> The Company: Flight Operations is working with the new Senior Vice
> President of Airport Operations and the ALPA Jumpseat Committee to
> resolve these issues. Should you encounter problems, please advise
> your flight office, LEC Representative or jumpseat coordinator.
>
>
>
> United MEC: OMC problems have been increasing and the frustration of
> our pilots is at epidemic and alarming levels. The UAL MEC Jumpseat
> Committee receives reports on a daily basis of misapplication of our
> rights. We strongly encourage all captains to ensure that they are
> fully aware of the status and location of all OMCs on your aircraft.
> We urge Captains, in your contact with Customer Service
> representatives at the gate, to request that they ensure that each and
> every OMC “check in” with you upon boarding, so credentials and seat
> location can be ascertained. Such information may be invaluable in an
> emergency or irregular situation. Further, we advocate that you
> advise all Customer Service agents that you would like OMC priorities
> A – J (cockpit OMCs and United pilots) to board the aircraft as early
> as possible so that you may brief them as to their safety and security
> roles.
>
>
>
> · Our first quarter results were disappointing. What are we
> doing to improve revenues and decrease non-labor costs?
>
> The Company: While our revenue performance has been in line with the
> industry, it has not met our expectations or potential. We are
> constantly working to maximize returns on the assets we have by
> putting the right equipment on the right routes and expanding service
> where we have an opportunity to improve revenues.
>
>
>
> The Company is engaged in a multi- year cost reduction program. For
> 2006, United's business plan includes $300 million in benefits over
> 2005. The Company has committed to an additional $400 million in cost
> savings starting in 2007 over and above what is in the business plan.
>
>
>
> To generate additional cost savings in 2007 and beyond, the Company is
> focused on fundamental improvements to its core business. Savings will
> come from improvements in both major processes, such as better flight
> planning to reduce fuel costs and navigation fees, and smaller
> processes, such as the consolidation of technology help desks. In
> addition, the Company will further reduce overhead spending for
> salaried and management personnel. United also expects to reduce
> marketing and sales expenses.
>
>
>
> United MEC: If the current stock price is any indication of Wall
> Street’s view, management still has a long way to go. It was about
> two years ago that I wrote to you outlining our analysis of where
> United was relative to American Airlines’ costs, excluding fuel and
> labor. We will continue to highlight our management’s shortcomings in
> this area.
>
>
>
> · Why are there so many grievances?
>
> The Company: Last year ALPA and the Company resolved 14 more
> grievances than were submitted, so the actual number of outstanding
> grievances has decreased.
>
> · Why are there so many system boards?
>
> The Company: Last year ALPA and the Company scheduled 11 system
> boards, a higher number than we have seen in the past. However, five
> of these cases were resolved before finishing the process. Six
> ultimately went to the board for a decision.
>
>
>
> United MEC: While the two FAQ answers are correct, they are correct
> only up to the part that was left out. It is true that more
> grievances in 2005 were resolved than submitted, but this was only
> because ALPA pushed for resolution of grievances that had been sitting
> in some cases for several years. Again, this was due to ALPA’s
> initiatives. The FAQ does not state that the number of grievances
> submitted in 2006 far EXCEEDS the number settled. Your local flight
> office management is well aware as to the reasons for this logjam.
>
>
>
> With regard to the system board issue, there are 24 days scheduled for
> 2006 for system boards (two per month.) This is an historic high.
> Never before have so many days been scheduled in anticipation of the
> Company’s refusal to resolve issues at the local level. Never before
> has ALPA been willing to commit the level of required financial and
> personnel resources to conduct system boards, notwithstanding the fact
> that we repeatedly advise the Company of our willingness to minimize
> this expense. System board litigation represents a huge expense for
> both parties.
>
>
>
> The perfect solution is for the Company and ALPA’s principals to sit
> down on a regular basis and talk through the issues underlying the
> various cases before being heard by the system board. Indeed, that’s
> what happened last year after we raised the issue to the highest
> levels of the corporation. ALPA has once again offered that same
> process for 2006. As of this date, we have had an initial meeting,
> and are awaiting a substantive response.
>
>
>
> · Why are we tracking dependability through AMS? How does the
> system work?
>
> The Company: We are tracking dependability through AMS because pilot
> sick leave is a significant cost for Flight Operations. Understanding
> and managing this expense is necessary for the continued success of
> United.
>
>
>
> AMS is a computer program that collects data from a variety of sources
> and compiles the data into a manageable format. The program has a
> variety of triggers that will cause a pilot’s schedule to be
> reviewed. These triggering events typically do not require any action
> but are useful in helping us make an accurate determination regarding
> dependability.
>
>
>
> It is critical for our pilots to understand that AMS has nothing to do
> with appropriate use of sick leave. If you are sick, stay home, get
> well and return to work as soon as you are healthy. If you are
> interested in seeing the AMS program stop by your Flight Office and
> ask a Flight Manager or Chief Pilot to show you the system.
>
>
>
> United MEC: United operated for 80 years without AMS. AMS is nothing
> more than a misguided and illogical attempt to place “round pegs into
> square holes.” Because the Company was having alleged “dependability
> problems” with other employee groups, pilots have been lumped into
> this same program without regard to the fact that federal aviation
> regulations override and dictate the actions required in the event of
> pilot sickness or disability of any kind. Placing arbitrary numbers
> on pilot “dependability events” has intimidated pilots into flying
> when they more properly (and LEGALLY) should have been at home. We
> will continue to press for the abolition of this poorly conceived and
> punitive “pilot pushing” program in any and all venues including
> appeal to the FAA when necessary. As the FAQ states, we can’t urge
> you strongly enough to utilize your sick leave for the purpose for
> which it is intended and not expose yourself or your flying partners
> to unnecessary risk or illness. We strongly agree where the FAQ
> states “If you are sick, stay home, get well…..”
>
>
>
> · Does the domicile have any say?
>
> The Company: Absolutely. While we certainly strive for consistency in
> administration of our dependability policies across the system, we
> also feel it is important that domiciles continue to have the latitude
> to apply sound judgment in reviewing and acting on dependability
> issues.
>
>
>
> United MEC: This statement belies the fact that, for example, OPBCM
> may create an “exception meter” which goes directly into AMS whenever
> they feel it is “appropriate.” The domicile has no way to remove that
> entry, thus allowing the crew desk to place sick leave occurrences
> into a pilot’s permanent record without any control of domicile
> management. There are still vast differences in the manner and scope
> between domiciles’ administration of this program. Pilot sick leave
> issues must be addressed on a case-by-case basis, which would
> eliminate this ill-conceived program from our system.
>
>
>
> As I stated at the beginning of this letter, it is impossible to
> comment on each and every statement in this document to which we take
> exception. I urge you to consider very carefully each and every
> communication you receive from management, and ask appropriate
> questions when you happen to encounter a future domicile meeting.
>
>
>
> As always, we will continue our efforts to negotiate quality of life
> provisions at each and every opportunity. We will continue to press
> your concerns with management to satisfactory conclusions.
>
>
>
> Fly the contract SAFELY.
>
>
>
> Fraternally,
>
>
>
> Captain Mark Bathurst
>
> Chairman, UAL-MEC
>