The "NEW UAL" Pass Travel Bulletin
#21
I agree about the health insurance thing. It is a joke and morally offensive.
However, the 6-month wait does NOT apply to the 401(k) and defined contribution plans here.
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 100
So, how much more is it going to cost to go round trip, Chicago-London, business class? I think it's currently about $350 (high departure fee's out of LHR).
I sure hope the no health benefits for six months doesn't carry over, it's tough with little kids that goto the doctor every month or so.
I sure hope the no health benefits for six months doesn't carry over, it's tough with little kids that goto the doctor every month or so.
Last edited by uafurlough; 04-01-2011 at 09:38 AM.
#24
Keep Calm Chive ON
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Spoke with guys who just decided to just 'roll the dice' and 'go w/o' since they were single....Then you'd run across those who had to "scrape-beg-borrow-steal" just to make ends meet on first year pay to meet the high price of 3rd Party coverage during that 6 month window so that their wife/kids would be covered during that wait....Pathetic.
NO Part 121 (needless to say a Major) pilot needs to put in that position.....EVER.
#25
The costs to those who actually have it continue to skyrocket due to health care companies' exemption from competition, and normal health care for 50 million folks is walking into an emergency room.
These are not hidden costs. We are billed for it every month in our premium payment.
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,542
It says it eliminates the super priority for retirees, but it does not say how active employees and retirees stack up.
I'd assume it is just based on seniority. So a retiree with 25 years of service would go ahead of an active employee with 20 years of service, while an active employee with 30 years of seniority would go ahead of a retiree with 25 years of seniority. Or is it by DOH? Or did they put active employees ahead of all retirees? I really hope the last option is not the case!!
I'd assume it is just based on seniority. So a retiree with 25 years of service would go ahead of an active employee with 20 years of service, while an active employee with 30 years of seniority would go ahead of a retiree with 25 years of seniority. Or is it by DOH? Or did they put active employees ahead of all retirees? I really hope the last option is not the case!!
#28
That is one thing I will give KUDOS to CAL for. At least they offer health benefits even to part-time employees.
#29
It says it eliminates the super priority for retirees, but it does not say how active employees and retirees stack up.
I'd assume it is just based on seniority. So a retiree with 25 years of service would go ahead of an active employee with 20 years of service, while an active employee with 30 years of seniority would go ahead of a retiree with 25 years of seniority. Or is it by DOH? Or did they put active employees ahead of all retirees? I really hope the last option is not the case!!
I'd assume it is just based on seniority. So a retiree with 25 years of service would go ahead of an active employee with 20 years of service, while an active employee with 30 years of seniority would go ahead of a retiree with 25 years of seniority. Or is it by DOH? Or did they put active employees ahead of all retirees? I really hope the last option is not the case!!
Read the bulletin plus the Q&A on the flying together website and all will be revealed to you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Flyin1500
Major
89
11-30-2008 09:10 PM