United Revives PBS AI Scheduling for Attendants Amid Backlash

United Airlines told tens of thousands of flight attendants in an email on Thursday, December 11, 2025 that it is again pressing for an AI-driven preferential bidding system (PBS) to build monthly work schedules, reopening a fight that many crew members thought was settled after the company dropped the idea earlier this year under heavy union pressure. The revived proposal lands in the middle of long-running contract talks with the Association of Flight Attendants‑CWA (AFA‑CWA), after flight attendants voted down Tentative Agreement 1 (TA1) in July and sent both sides back to the table.

What United says: “modernize bidding” with a joint process

In the message, United described what it called a “joint process with AFA to modernize bidding,” pitching the change as a way to give flight attendants more say and flexibility in where they fly, when they work, and how their days off land.

But many flight attendants heard the phrase as a reboot of a plan the union had warned would tilt power toward management by shifting decisions into an algorithm few workers can see or challenge.

“PBS” framed as modernization — but for front‑line workers, AI often signals new management tools that can limit discretion and make results harder to explain.

Line bidding vs. PBS: how the systems differ

• Line bidding system (current):
  • The airline publishes pre‑built “lines” of flying and crew members bid on those packages by seniority.
  • Senior flight attendants generally pick first from the most desirable lines; junior employees take what remains.
  • Union argues it’s more predictable because everyone can view the same set of trips and understand what is available.
• Preferential Bidding System (PBS):
  • Built around individual preferences—flight attendants submit bids for desired destinations, layover lengths, days off, aircraft types, etc.
  • Software matches those preferences against coverage needs.
  • Supporters say well-designed PBS can give some people better outcomes.
  • Critics warn PBS can make results harder to explain, and similar bids can yield very different outcomes for different workers.

Timeline of key events

Why the proposal reopened the fight

AFA‑CWA opposed the first PBS push, arguing it would:

• Reduce transparency
• Make shift swaps harder
• Disproportionately impact lower‑seniority workers

After mediation, United backed away on April 25, 2025, a move many flight attendants described as a relief because it kept a human layer in scheduling decisions. The new message suggests United is again asking for items the union believed had been taken off the table, which crew members view as a potential concession United wants in exchange for wage and work‑rule gains.

Negotiation context and bargaining math

• The contract has been amendable since 2021, so bargaining can change terms while old ones remain in force.
• Flight attendants say wage growth has not kept pace with rising living costs during years of protracted bargaining.
• United, according to provided material, is seeking concessions like PBS to offset union demands for better pay without increasing the overall cost of a new deal (sometimes called “TA2” in bargaining chatter).
• A recent week of bargaining in Chicago produced some reported improvements, yet the reintroduction of PBS surprised many crew members.

Other sources of tension: the “on‑call” layover rule

Another contested issue that surfaced in TA1 was a proposed “on‑call” layover rule, which would have required flight attendants to remain available after rest periods and to recheck schedules after flights.

• The union rejected this approach and later clarified parts were already existing policy.
• That clarification added confusion and distrust for workers trying to distinguish what was new, what was existing, and what might expand under new contract language.

Technology, automation, and real‑world effects

United’s materials say the company is modernizing crew tools with AI built on AWS services, aiming for:

• Real‑time visibility
• More proactive scheduling during IRROPS (irregular operations like weather, mechanical issues, air‑traffic delays)

United frames the work as moving human schedulers into more strategic roles rather than replacing them in day‑to‑day decisions. Still, for many flight attendants “AI” signals management will have new ways to set rules, measure compliance, and limit discretion.

The concern is tangible: separate 2025 plans cut 8% of non‑crew jobs through AI automation (including some management and customer‑service roles), which reminded flight attendants that support tools can evolve into cost‑cutting systems over time.

Operational reality vs. bargaining proposal

The source material stresses an important distinction:

• There is no evidence PBS is active at United today.
• PBS is currently a bargaining proposal, not a deployed system.
• The present operational system remains the line bidding system.

This matters for flight attendants planning responses and for travelers who might fear immediate changes to staffing.

Broader human impacts: scheduling, immigration, and labor rights

Scheduling rules affect quality of life and can be especially consequential for immigrant workers and those with cross‑border responsibilities:

• Predictable time off matters for visa appointments, passport renewals, and immigration‑related meetings.
• Less predictable schedules raise stress for workers who send money abroad or support family overseas.
• Many noncitizen workers fear retaliation and may hesitate to speak up when policies change.

For workers seeking to act together, protections exist: see the National Labor Relations Board’s overview of employee rights under the NLRA: https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/employees/your-rights-under-nlra

What’s at stake in bargaining

The core disputes over PBS often narrow down to specific guardrails:

• What data is used by the algorithm?
• What priorities does the code follow (seniority, preferences, operational needs)?
• What can be appealed if a schedule seems unfair?
• What information does a worker see when they receive an unexpected schedule?

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, employment‑based mobility pressures (travel for documents, family obligations, tight timelines) make control over scheduling a real quality‑of‑life issue, not just an internal operational debate.

Current status and outlook

As of December 13, 2025, negotiations are ongoing with no set end date. Any change to scheduling practices will depend on the final contract language agreed to by United and AFA‑CWA.

For flight attendants who lived through the spring backlash and the summer rejection of TA1, the return of the AI‑driven PBS is a reminder that the hardest issues—pay, time, and who controls them—remain unresolved. The next agreement will likely be judged as much by day‑to‑day impacts on reserve status and layovers as by headline wage figures.