Originally Posted by
Rocketiii
I have heard this is was a big sticking point and why compensation issues had yet to be presented to the 'company'. However, the UAL contract has both the 747 and 777 under one pay rate, so I don't see how that would affect current SLI issues. And FWIW, I think that was ironed out in Denver last week as it really isn't an issue in SLI because the two aircraft contractually pay the same. An issue for the future JCBA? Yes. An issue for current SLI? I think not.
Was through Houston today and spoke briefly with a "Red Lanyard" Rep who was in Ops.....this is what he explained: (I know your not UAL, but his answer was based using UAL's former CBA).
He referred to UAL's present contract which has the B747/B777 on the same hourly pay/under one pay rate as you quoted above. He seemed to 'think' that under the previous UAL contract (2000??), old UAL's pay-rates for the above mentioned equipment was different....IE the B747 had a separate hr rate (higher) than that of the B777 rate back at that time.
The disparity mentioned above comes when in/if any
future contract is ratified (IE having the new JCBA in the old UAL method of your contract 2000, the two above platforms paying different scales), there is the anticipation of a fence being est on the B747 for the UAL guys. Having that equipment paying more (higher than that of the B777) would present a 'barring' of the senior/top CAL pilots from being able to 'touch' the highest obtainable pay rates w/o out being able to fly the B747 per the fence that are anticipated to be in place in any future SLI post the JCBA ratification.....follow??
In speaking with him, I do understand his point.....the top CAL pilots expect some type of fence (rightfully so) to protect old UAL's Golden Goose, but in the same respect, it segregates the top CAL integrated pilot's from obtaining the present top category of pay (assuming the B747 is be the solo/top paying bird) is a sticking point that sets the scene of contention in any likely future plans in integrated the lists post JCBA.
Clear as mud??
After listening to the explanation (didn't have a lot of time to stick around as there was a few other guys present to asking then to dispel rumors & I was trying to catch the commute home), it does make
some sense if that's how the former/pre-BK CBA did actually read & this was something that was trying to be reconstucted in any future agreement. I don't see it as getting directly involved in an SLI issue, but CAL's side of the Joint Neg Comm trying to prevent something that they see as a potential windfall issue in the future anticipated arbitration following a JCBA ratification going into the SLI. Why not stop the smoke now if there is some anticipation of the possibility of a full-blown fire in the not so distant future on the next step of the pilot group being a single list??