View Single Post
Old 11-02-2010 | 11:43 AM
  #15  
Rocketiii's Avatar
Rocketiii
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Flyguppy
No, there is definitely a contradiction here.

The contradiction is that the CAL MEC needs the JCBA compensation to "paint the full picture" to the SLI arbiter.

Therefore, they do not want the much larger 747 to pay more than their largest airplane, the 777. The banding United went to was a concessionary bankruptcy giveback. The CAL MEC does not want that concession to go away.

Nice, huh?
The CAL side does not want a new negotiated pay rate to unfairly skew a SLI. You keep talking about your concessionary giveback. You cant keep saying "Well, back in the day we were bada$$ and we had a great contract in 01 and that should be what our career expectations should be based on". It doesnt work that way. When the merger was announced or at least became effective defines the starting point for the integration. Continental was past the ammendable date and actively negotiating a contract in some of the most lucrative times in recent history for the industry. Should we say that we expected to get much more return and our 787 pilots would be paid for than 747 guys and they should be inserted at the top of the list? Of course not.

This is about SLI. Repeating over and over again about the CAL NC pushing for a common rate between the 747 and 777 and how that is some sort of personal assualt on you is ridiculous. UAL has always defended their 747 pay and equipment as the holy grail. That is fine. But call a spade a spade. Its about a perceived equity and no windfall to certain parts of the seniority list at specific airlines. If we were going to play that game, we could discuss the greater increase in wages that UAL will receive over the CAL guys with ANY new contract. It isnt helpful. If you dont like it, call your reps and direct your negotiators to quit going along with it.

Nice, huh?
Reply