Originally Posted by
Gupboy
Where does Career expectations fit in to the above scenario? does it even cross your mind that the ARBS may use "to include, but not limited to" latitude given to them by the new policy? What status is furloughed?
You are making a broad assumption that longevity will be weighted that heavily. Do you at least agree that a pilot hired at CAL in 2005, even stove-piped was a senior narrow body FO in 2010, where a UAL pilot hired years before that CAL pilot was furloughed. Which means that CAL longevity while measured in time is less, but in value is greater...in fact much greater since that CAL pilot actually was/is working.
I've said all along that this will play out within 2% of active pilot relative seniority. Some will fare better than others.
All good points.
You are wrong about one thing. I didn't "heavily" weight longevity. I think it will be close to the same weight for "status and category". Which is the UAL proposal. Equal weight. Arbs will do either more, less, or same.
UAL included all the furloughed pilots (UAL and CAL) in the "furloughed" status and category. They were placed below all the pilots in the narrowbody FO status. The only reason some of them ended up with active pilots is because they have more longevity. Some as many as 7 years.
Here is a breakdown from CAL submitting seniority list plus the CAL 2010 Staffing roster. This is a STOVEPIPE method. Doesn't care WHO holds what. Its as if every bid their highest position. (767 means 757 and 767 fleet positions)
777 Captain = 211 positions. Most junior pilot #211 hired 9/21/1981
767 Captain = 603 positions. Most junior pilot #814 hired 7/1/1985
737 Captain = 1,253 positions. Most junior pilot #2,067 hired 1/3/1990
777 F/O = 440 positions. Most junior pilot #2,507 hired 2/4/1998
767 FO = 839 positions. Most junior pilot #3,346 hired 5/3/2005
737 FO = 1,292 positions. Most junior pilot #4,638 hired 11/12/2007.
Everyone else junior to that essentially furloughed or very close.
So 2005 hires were "senior narowbody FOs." Actually no one junior to a 1990 hire can hold Captain at CAL on a strict stovepipe method as of 2010. All based on CAL MC supplied list and CAL staffing data published by CAL.
Also remember this. CAL has 275 737s. UAL has 152 Airbus. So CAL has FAR MORE positions available in that status and category. More slots in the bottom of the list for CAL pilots to occupy because you brought more of those to the table. So you've got lots of 737 FO jobs to fill, lots more than the UAL Airbus 320s and 319s. So yes, more CAL pilots in the bottom of the list (not counting furloughs)
The UAL list did have everyone within 5% of their 2010 standing. It has been ridiculed as OUTRAGEOUS. Much of the people on here are quoting their 2013 relative percentage which is skewed because they are counting UAL pilots as if they are on the bottom of their list, which they WEREN'T in 2010. So the bottom CAL pilot in 2010 is magically not 100% on the list, but he's somehow 83% on the list. And when he gets put back at 100% he complains he "lost" 17%, which he didn't. Those pilots aren't really junior to him.
So there is going to be a tradeoff between status and category and longevity. Which means there will be furloughees placed in front of active pilots because they have more longevity. Far more in some cases.
At least the merger policy says it has to be included.