Originally Posted by
Coto Pilot
As has been posted, none of us know what an arbitrator will decide. That being said, the fact that you are currently furloughed or were furloughed at some point in your career has little to do with your long term career expectations. There are United furloughees that be it not for the merger, would have been number one on the seniority list when they retired, that didn't change because they happened to be furloughed for a period of time. The right of recall is contractually negotiated and your relative position on the list doesn't change when you return, although you might move up if some ahead of you resign. A United pilot hired in 1999 or 2000 would have approximately 1700 Continental pilots that were hired after them. If you took away credit for the years on furlough during the SLI, almost all of those Continental pilots would still be behind them because Continental didn't do the bulk of their hiring until the mid 2000's. ALPA policy doesn't dictate how to weigh each of the criteria, that will be up to the arbitrtator. As for the viability of United without Continental, Jeff Smisek is on record as saying that Continental would have gone away without the merger.
Jeff Smisek has also gone on record saying that the cheaper CAL coffee, fresh brew, taste better then the more expensive Starbucks that was on the UAL side. What's your point? Rationalization will always occur after a decision has been made. Especially when the decision is questioned by many, who have not gained or even lost something from the decision, while the decision maker stands to gain a lot.
The decision to merge was made by Smisek, and he has made and will continue to make lots of more money because of it. Investors have made nothing, employees have made nothing and I'm not sure if the customers have made any gains out of this. Same with the coffee, investors/employees/customers nothing, but now that they are spending less on coffee the bonus pool will be bigger. But Jeff thinks the coffee taste better.