The reason that CAL was the first ALPA carrier to implement a military affairs or liaison committee was because of the strife of the CAL military pilots post 9-11 in securing their proper benefits. The reason many became frustrated with the process and with management's attitudes towards military pilots was because of said committee's inability to deliver the proper benefits to their military pilots.

You made my argument for me. LCAL management screwed their military guys pretty hard and took advantage of their goodwill and patience. The CAL ALPA MEC chose to allow management to go down a road that was in non-compliance without being checked. This contributed to the angst and anger of many a dues paying ALPA pilot.

I fully believe that all USSERA/ESGR problems UAL is having today is because of the LCAL problems post 9-11 and post contract '02. I think we can fully agree on that. It was easy to read the L-UAL contract and compare language in these areas as well as examine the L-UAL contract enforcement and determine that CAL was doing it differently. Differently isn't necessarily illegal, that is to say until you examine actual enforcement decisions and the law.

Jeff Smizek set the tone on this stuff, and his subordinates followed his lead. What is very odd is that the L CAL Chief Counsel didn't come to UAL after the merger. The only one I believe who came was Jeff Wall. This may or may not be in his area of responsibility, but it is a logical conclusion as to why we continue to have so much difficulty.

It's been refreshing to see people like Abbot, Starley, J. Martin, and a few others be put out to pasture post merger. They were impediments to progress and labor relations. If there are any more "old heads" still in key roles impeding progress then I hope that they are re-assigned, or let go.

It was a mystery to me that L-UAL, which was an ALPA carrier, had so much dissimilar language in the CBA and in the actual transition and process agreement (TPA) then did L-CAL pilots. ALPA National does indeed need to make sure all of it's ALPA carriers have correct interpretations in place. Otherwise your paying for the same ground twice and three times over at various MEC's across the land.

The MEC's may or may not be smart enough to do this on their own, and if you have an MEC led by someone like JP, then you are likely to go down a path that will short change your military pilots. This goes back to what the current (big money) contractual fight is over: the hold back?? I don't think anyone is going to see their money any time soon. It's the same for the LTD over-payments.

We have many pilots trusting that the record keeping, etc. is correct. Now that cases like this are being brought forward, I see plenty of people going into their shoe-boxes and pulling out records trying to compare it to what the computer screen says.