Merged CAL/UAL seniority lists
#61
#62
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
I have no doubt CAL ALPA is saying that. Now, go read the the active merger policy available on the ALPA website. Then, approach the process from a neutral standpoint. Better yet, read the USAIR Nicolau ruling and read CALs own pilot member and his issues with the determination for failing to take longevity into account. Believe his name is Bruschia.
Then come back and try again. You guys set the stage for the new policy. BTW, I believe he is on your merger commitee as well.
Lee
Then come back and try again. You guys set the stage for the new policy. BTW, I believe he is on your merger commitee as well.
Lee
#63
#64
With all due respect, you need to understand what UAL is bringing to the table (again, twice as many WBs as CAL and a huge international presence) and admit to yourself that the UAL pilots do have significant career expectations. Just because CAL's current upgrade time is shorter than UAL's does not mean that the career expectation of a UAL pilot is "nada," or even that "CAL's is 10x UAL's." That is simply ridiculous.
Aren't you salivating just a little at the prospect of your airline's widebody fleet tripling in size?? C'mon, you can admit it! Better pay! More days off! Who wouldn't like that? And now you want to jump ahead of all those United pilots who have been waiting in line for the higher paying, better quality-of-life equipment?
Straight relative seniority would place you closer to the higher-paying, better QOL equipment than you have ever been. It would place me further away than I have ever been since being a new-hire well over a decade ago. How would that be fair? If the fleet types of our two companies were more closely aligned, I would say straight relative seniority would be a go. But they're not. And it's not.
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Can't say for the volunteered furlough, but as most people will tell you furloughees will not go ahead of ANY active pilots. It just doesn't happen. CAL ALPA is saying they will will not settle for anything less then relative seniority+career expectations. And I am sure UAL ALPA is saying the opposite. Relative seniority is the only fair integration for both sides, if you are 50% you stay 50%. How much fairer can you get.
#66
Do you know why the top 517 slots went to US Airways in the America West merger? Because of the widebody disparities between the 2 airlines. You are right, relative seniority is fair....within aircraft types. 111 Widebodies vs 46 widebodies is going to be addressed with more UAL pilots than CAL pilots slotted in the top of the list-just like US AIR/ Am West. CAL, with more narrowbodies will see more favorable slotting in that part of the list. JMHO
These are very realistic expecations.
Furloughs will be placed on the bottom as they are not on property. Sucks, but that's the way it is.
As far as the snapshot, it was yesterday.
#68
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Thor:
With all due respect, you need to understand what UAL is bringing to the table (again, twice as many WBs as CAL and a huge international presence) and admit to yourself that the UAL pilots do have significant career expectations. Just because CAL's current upgrade time is shorter than UAL's does not mean that the career expectation of a UAL pilot is "nada," or even that "CAL's is 10x UAL's." That is simply ridiculous.
Aren't you salivating just a little at the prospect of your airline's widebody fleet tripling in size?? C'mon, you can admit it! Better pay! More days off! Who wouldn't like that? And now you want to jump ahead of all those United pilots who have been waiting in line for the higher paying, better quality-of-life equipment?
Straight relative seniority would place you closer to the higher-paying, better QOL equipment than you have ever been. It would place me further away than I have ever been since being a new-hire well over a decade ago. How would that be fair? If the fleet types of our two companies were more closely aligned, I would say straight relative seniority would be a go. But they're not. And it's not.
With all due respect, you need to understand what UAL is bringing to the table (again, twice as many WBs as CAL and a huge international presence) and admit to yourself that the UAL pilots do have significant career expectations. Just because CAL's current upgrade time is shorter than UAL's does not mean that the career expectation of a UAL pilot is "nada," or even that "CAL's is 10x UAL's." That is simply ridiculous.
Aren't you salivating just a little at the prospect of your airline's widebody fleet tripling in size?? C'mon, you can admit it! Better pay! More days off! Who wouldn't like that? And now you want to jump ahead of all those United pilots who have been waiting in line for the higher paying, better quality-of-life equipment?
Straight relative seniority would place you closer to the higher-paying, better QOL equipment than you have ever been. It would place me further away than I have ever been since being a new-hire well over a decade ago. How would that be fair? If the fleet types of our two companies were more closely aligned, I would say straight relative seniority would be a go. But they're not. And it's not.
Why do you think it is fair that a CAL pilot a 50% on the F/O list holding holding 16-18 days off a month with 76 flying should now be behind your reserve guys?
I agree, relative seniority is not fair. We should, and hopefully get, career expectations plus relative seniority. I believe along with 4700 others that we have a very good case along with past precedents.
We shall see how it shall pan out. Nobody will be happy, but if you look at history relative seniority is everything, sorry. Currently 50%, stay 50%. Strange you can argue that.
#69
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
It goes by bodies in seats. UAL has xx w/b positions, CAL has xx. After the integration, those ratios should be about the same and at the top of the list. It doesn't matter what the pilots within those numbers actually fly/bid. Does that make sense?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post