Originally Posted by
Andy
A 1999 hire doesn't have 10 years of furlough time. The most time that any furloughee would have would be a 2001 hire; probably ~8 years of furlough time. That means he's got 3 years time on property. Are you saying that with his 3 years on property and 8 years on the street, he should be stapled below a 2008 CAL hire?
I could make a very strong argument for a snapshot date being taken in 2008 based on Continental joining the Star alliance. As a result of DOJ's objections, LUAL dumped the 737 fleet. Will UALALPA's lawyer push for a snapshot date in 2008 based on CAL joining the Star alliance? I don't know but I bet he's thought about it.
In 2008, a 1999 hire had 3+ more years on property than a 2005 CAL hire. Just another perspective.
Fair and equitable is in the eye of the beholder. And it'll be decided by an arbitration panel, with each side's lawyers bringing forth their best arguments. LCAL has Katz; LUAL has Freund. Nothing that is said on these boards will change that.
In 2008, the CAL 2005 hire was able to bid and hold 737 captain. Yet another perspective. But in the end, your side will make a damn good argument for your people and our side will make a damn good argument for guys on our list and when it gets nowhere, an arbitrator will take both arguments and spend months putting a list together that mitigates as much loss to both sides as possible and attempts to prevent any seniority group from any segment of either list from obtaining a "windfall". You and I will be running numbers for hours trying to see where the two of us will end up at retirement, what our career earnings potential will be etc. I'm prepared to live with it. None of us wanted to be put in this position but we can make the best of it. We have to make the best of it.
Take care