NRT, HKG and FRA FA Bases Closing (Oct 2020), re-assignment issues
Jun 6, 2020, 8:28 pm
#61
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Won't that cost more to UA? The cost for Day 2 and 4 was eliminated by HKG crews?
Also, how about:
1. The aircraft? Using the pre-COVID-19 schedule as the blueprint, there would be 1 B772, i.e. the one for EWR-HKG available?
Note - because the 2 SFO-HKG B772/Ws turned around within hours, it is impossible to make SFO-HKG-SIN works unless UA eliminate the night flight. Also - HKG-EWR scheduling was not exactly a match the former SIN-HKG
2. Transit passengers?
Also, how about:
1. The aircraft? Using the pre-COVID-19 schedule as the blueprint, there would be 1 B772, i.e. the one for EWR-HKG available?
Note - because the 2 SFO-HKG B772/Ws turned around within hours, it is impossible to make SFO-HKG-SIN works unless UA eliminate the night flight. Also - HKG-EWR scheduling was not exactly a match the former SIN-HKG
2. Transit passengers?
All of your questions are easily addressed and have nothing to do with a FA domicile.
Jun 6, 2020, 9:04 pm
#62
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
But I stand my ground - no HKG crew, no HKG-SIN.
We can all agree to disagree. But I can tell we are way beyond.
Jun 6, 2020, 10:01 pm
#63
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,707
I took your first quote to mean for various *legal* reasons, as in U.S. crews are not legally allowed to operate HKG-SIN due to some bilateral aviation freedom (or something) agreement restrictions.
Now you seem to be saying that the incremental costs of UA operating HKG-SIN without a HKG F/A domicile might make that route economically unviable, You very well might be right, so no argument from me on that point. Neither of us has the data to be sure.
Jun 7, 2020, 12:18 am
#64
formerly 1984SW
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Merida, Yucatan, Mexico
Programs: UA
Posts: 1,058
(1) UA closing the HKG/NRT/FRA bases and having those eligible F/As displace into USA domiciles where vacancies are designated by UA on 01-Oct.
(2) The supposed system-wide involuntary furlough coming, also on 01-Oct.
Jun 7, 2020, 1:55 pm
#65
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: ORD, HKG
Programs: UA*G, AA Emerald, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt globalist
Posts: 10,279
The flight is bookable on United.com and United App as well.
https://downloads.regulations.gov/DO...tachment_1.pdf
UA869 dep SFO 1340 arr HKG 1845+1
UA869 dep HKG 20:45+1 arr SIN 0035+2
UA862 dep SIN 0600 arr HKG 0945
UA862 dep HKG 1130 arr SFO 0910
Flights will be operated using 787-9
Hope we are all on the same page now that the HKG-SIN-HKG flights will take place not IF it will take place..
Jun 7, 2020, 2:04 pm
#66
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: ORD, HKG
Programs: UA*G, AA Emerald, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt globalist
Posts: 10,279
They actually rotate frequently, ORD-HKG used to be half ORD base and half HKG base, then after that it changed to one month ORD base, one month HKG base, then later on changed to HKG base only.
The way i know HKG-SIN can be flown by ORD base is because i flew ORD-HKG enough through the years that i became friends with 4 pursers that are senior enough that can actually hold ORD-HKG as pursers, they showed me the lines they can bid on, one of them was ORD-HKG and HKG-SIN.
The way i know HKG-SIN can be flown by ORD base is because i flew ORD-HKG enough through the years that i became friends with 4 pursers that are senior enough that can actually hold ORD-HKG as pursers, they showed me the lines they can bid on, one of them was ORD-HKG and HKG-SIN.
Jun 7, 2020, 3:12 pm
#68
formerly wunderpit
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ONT-SNA-LAX
Programs: UA1K-HHDiamond
Posts: 1,342
Forgive my ignorance, but how does this affect the ROUTE to NRT, for instance? Is the route still being run, but with U.S-based crews only that just get the mandatory rest period and hop back on the next day to the U.S.?
Jun 7, 2020, 3:57 pm
#69
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
FRA, HKG and NRT shared a common characteristic in the past - each of these destinations had at least 1 5th freedom flight - FRA-KWI, HKG-SGN/SIN, NRT-ICN.
But now all the 5th freedom flights are all gone. So these based crews are simply the replacement for the U.S. crews.
It is also why HKG is discussed more because HKG-SIN just resumed.
Jun 7, 2020, 5:14 pm
#70
Join Date: May 2006
Location: PMD
Programs: UA*G, NW, AA-G. WR-P, HH-G, IHG-S, ALL. TT-GE.
Posts: 2,911
It takes about 150 FAs to fly a daily 30-hour round trip route, so if the HKG base had always been about 300, with HKG-SIN they could not staff 2 HK-US routes completely. It was probably the termination of SIN that gave them both SFO and ORD. After UA/CO merge HKG base flew EWR too. Then when ORD was cut in late 2019, and HKG-EWR staffing remained mixed (EWR/HKG), the HKG base was given W-pattern routes like SFO-HND, SFO-ICN, and even EWR-LHR.
Someone can enlighten us, I don't think non-US national/LPR crew can commute to work legally from a US base.
Someone can enlighten us, I don't think non-US national/LPR crew can commute to work legally from a US base.
Jun 7, 2020, 5:49 pm
#71
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Programs: United Gold
Posts: 2,047
the HKG-SIN route should start In July. HKG domicile ends October. There would be three months for those crews to work the flight
clearly, UA hopes to fly direct SFO-SIN by then. If not perhaps they delay the closure a month or so.
Jun 7, 2020, 5:56 pm
#72
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
I was educated in this topic previously. While non-US national/LPR can't perform domestic duties, they can still use the D visa to perform necessary international duty. For example, a former HKG crew can be reassign to SFO (very likely in this case) base and continue to work on SFO-HKG. If necessary, the crew can be deadheaded to EWR for EWR-HKG. But the crew can't work on the P.S. route, i.e. SFO-EWR.
Based on my reading, the operating base concepts applies to fishing vessels, not aircraft.
Jun 7, 2020, 6:33 pm
#73
Join Date: Feb 2016
Programs: Hyatt Globalist | Jumpseat Platinum
Posts: 546
They can.
I was educated in this topic previously. While non-US national/LPR can't perform domestic duties, they can still use the D visa to perform necessary international duty. For example, a former HKG crew can be reassign to SFO (very likely in this case) base and continue to work on SFO-HKG. If necessary, the crew can be deadheaded to EWR for EWR-HKG. But the crew can't work on the P.S. route, i.e. SFO-EWR.
Based on my reading, the operating base concepts applies to fishing vessels, not aircraft.
I was educated in this topic previously. While non-US national/LPR can't perform domestic duties, they can still use the D visa to perform necessary international duty. For example, a former HKG crew can be reassign to SFO (very likely in this case) base and continue to work on SFO-HKG. If necessary, the crew can be deadheaded to EWR for EWR-HKG. But the crew can't work on the P.S. route, i.e. SFO-EWR.
Based on my reading, the operating base concepts applies to fishing vessels, not aircraft.
However, as there are no provisions in the CBA to "fence off" domestic vs international flying (like there was at PMCO prior to October 2018, and at PMUA years ago), there would need to be some form of LOA between AFA and UAL where these folks are allowed to only work those trips (and essentially bid out of seniority order for them). That is, of course, assuming there is the appetite for that on both sides -- and I don't know that there is.
Jun 7, 2020, 9:04 pm
#74
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
That is my understanding as well.
However, as there are no provisions in the CBA to "fence off" domestic vs international flying (like there was at PMCO prior to October 2018, and at PMUA years ago), there would need to be some form of LOA between AFA and UAL where these folks are allowed to only work those trips (and essentially bid out of seniority order for them). That is, of course, assuming there is the appetite for that on both sides -- and I don't know that there is.
However, as there are no provisions in the CBA to "fence off" domestic vs international flying (like there was at PMCO prior to October 2018, and at PMUA years ago), there would need to be some form of LOA between AFA and UAL where these folks are allowed to only work those trips (and essentially bid out of seniority order for them). That is, of course, assuming there is the appetite for that on both sides -- and I don't know that there is.
So I don't think AFA would mind at all.
Jun 8, 2020, 6:20 am
#75
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,707
That is my understanding as well.
However, as there are no provisions in the CBA to "fence off" domestic vs international flying (like there was at PMCO prior to October 2018, and at PMUA years ago), there would need to be some form of LOA between AFA and UAL where these folks are allowed to only work those trips (and essentially bid out of seniority order for them). That is, of course, assuming there is the appetite for that on both sides -- and I don't know that there is.
However, as there are no provisions in the CBA to "fence off" domestic vs international flying (like there was at PMCO prior to October 2018, and at PMUA years ago), there would need to be some form of LOA between AFA and UAL where these folks are allowed to only work those trips (and essentially bid out of seniority order for them). That is, of course, assuming there is the appetite for that on both sides -- and I don't know that there is.
Inefficient, yes; but no LoA necessary and nothing out-of-seniority about it (assuming such a trip is awarded to HKG-based F/As in seniority order).