Originally Posted by
AV82SKI
You obviously didn't read the arbitrators ruling. Career expectations of both carriers were considered EQUAL and therefore received no weight. The arbitrators used 65% status and equipment and 35% longevity. It is the greater longevity of the United furloughed pilots that put them ahead of an active CAL pilot. Of course, that is using your longevity in 2010.
For example, a 2007 hire at CAL with 3.5 years longevity and employed was paired with a UAL pilot with 7 years longevity but furloughed. LONGEVITY, LONGEVITY, LONGEVITY, that is the reason the UAL pilots "won."
FYI, by the time the list came out, the CAL guy now has 6.5 years longevity and the furloughed UAL pilot is holding steady at 7 years, still furloughed.
Neither side got longevity credit for time after 2010. So you make it seem like a CAL guy stopped accruing it, but the UAL ones did. Longevity from 2010-2013 didn't matter because the merger happened in 2010 and this process retroactively made a list based on the S&C and Longevity of the merger date just like every other merger.
The pipe dream of 2013 longevity and 2013 S&C didn't come to fruition.
We "won" because we followed policy and asked for a list that made sense, and not because the arbs didn't reach outside policy and use a future merger date or made up status and category ignoring airplane size and fantasy staffing numbers.