Originally Posted by
A320fumes
Evidently not, if it's offers 171 the same relief that we offered others.
The action taken Oct 25, 2013 (MOU 14) was clearly a carve out for ORD, LAX, SEA. There wasn't a complaint mentioned by 171 Pilots, who voted in favor of supporting those Pilots. There wasn't a complaint by YOU to offer SEA, ORD or LAX relief. Even here, APC, there are about 20 pages of dissent for the 171 resolution. The 171 resolution gives grandfather rights to ALL United Pilots. In contrast, MOU 14 provides relief for SEA, ORD and LAX only. How can attitudes be so clearly different?
Read the "Official" literature.
Ben,
You can try as hard as you wish to equate the LOA to what you're trying to do in 171, the they are different situations.
They did not deal with a simple drawdown in flying or a base rebalance. It dealt with things like base closure and reopening.
You are simply trying to protect pilots that are in seats which, based on recent bidding results, shows they are there out of seniority.....and only there because of pre-SLI antics.
Did the LOAs go against the contract? Yes. Did it protect pilots that could not have held those seats with a normal bid once they reopened ORD? Absolutely not.