Originally Posted by
XHooker
.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding how our retro formula worked. My understanding is half was based on income earned and half was based on the time flying on property. I don't see how a longevity element could possibly help those who were out only for themselves.
I don't know enough about the mil pilots cause to say yea or nay. If their cause is just, I hope they get it. However, there are valid reasons for the method of calculation of the retro. My bet is the lawyers will make money and anything recovered from CALALPA by the plaintiffs won't even cover the legal fees.
If you were on property earning a pay check do you need this 48 month look back at all? It essentially makes no difference to a guy who was here for 48 bid months working. He still gets paid, his w-2 earnings are likely fairly good, unless he didn't fly at all (reserve???). But, most of our reserves hump it, so maybe not....
Anyway, no need for a 48 month look back, unless you are specifically trying to exclude and penalize military and LTD pilots. Why else would you include it? Why did UAL not include it? The 48 month look back is an unnecessary complexity designed to penalize some; and of course if you penalize one group, you do give to another.