Originally Posted by
757Driver
I'm all for the 747's being paid the highest as long as there aren't any fences around them.
What that letter doesn't address is that the UAL MEC passed a resolution mandating that it pay the highest, not the other way around. As far as I know the joint NC came up with an agreed upon section 3 and the UAL MEC shot it down, not CAL's.
Facts are a tricky thing as my buddy Coto likes to point out.
75,
Fences come about usually during arbitration (since that is where SLI's seem to always go...except AA/TWA) as a means to equalize an inequity that cannot be adequately addressed in a "fair/balanced" (as determined by the arbiter) seniority list integration. If you read a final decision, they state their rationale for fences based on x, y, and z, as they do with all their decisions regarding the final list.
I don't know what is going on regarding what exactly was passed. Nor, do I now what the UAL MEC's desire is other than I assume to go back to the prior size, weight, payload, speed equation for pay rates which of course requires un-banding.
Therefore, I don't see the CAL MEC's point of this stance. Don't see what they may think they are going to advantage themselves with. UA has more wide-body aircraft. Pay banding or un-banding will not change that or the approach taken by the inevitable arbitration process. That fact, and not pay, will be the driving issue in the "career expectations" evaluation.
My 2 cents.
Frats,
Lee