Originally Posted by
A320fumes
Unfortunately, that's the name of the game. One would be very naive to think that the sole reason for the current battle over the 747 carve-out is solely because the UAL MEC thinks the 747 should pay more than the 777. Again, One would be very naive to think that the attempted 747 carve-out is because the UAL MEC thinks that the 747 should pay more than the 777. It's an attempt at a seniority grab and they are obligated to pursue said feeble attempt. It's not personal.
The root of the problem is what is personal:
"While this has been advertised as a merger of corporate equals, that does not make it a merger of pilot groups with equal career expectations. The equities that each pilot group brings to the table are what they are, and attempts to manipulate those equities through the JCBA process are fundamentally flawed and disadvantageous to every pilot on both properties who desire the best JCBA possible."-W Morse
The "Expectations" of the UAL pilot group prior to and after the merger announcement seem to have changed drastically. As a CAL pilot, it is my understanding that the UAL pilot group could only had 1 expectation. That expectation was akin to some fat Wh@rE perfumed-up and sold, by pimp Tilton, to whoever would lay with her. Unfortunately, it was CAL instead of USAir to submit to Tilton's pathetic proposition. Now UAL has started re-writing history. And the CAL pilot group is really regretting our decision to fraternally hire UAL furloughees, instead of negotiating something in exchange.
The sad part is that the attempted 747 carve-out would primarily only help the very Sr UAL pilots. With UAL furloughees shortly coming to CAL, I think it would have been much more prudent to foster unity and get an agreement on not picking-up open time to hasten their recall. Instead they poisoned the well early and who knows what happens with regard to open time once all 148 of our furloughees are employed over the next few months.
The UAL MEC's arrogance is unbelievable. I hope we can return to civility before too much damage has been done. For now, we'll just sit back and eagerly await the "career expectations" debate. The CAL pilot group, corporate America and the Arbitrators will probably be more interested in this century. May 2, 2010 has been the only good news you guys have had, with regard to "career expectations" in almost a decade.
So why not get the absolute best JCBA we can, and leave any and all gains for either side OUT of the SLI arguments?
That way, the argument you make about UAL's career expectations can be made without any gains that are made in the JCBA.
Instead, it seems that CAL wants to use the JCBA 'to paint the entire picture'. Oh, BUT, they only want to use it once they force lower pay onto certain aircraft. CAL CERTAINLY wouldn't want to 'paint the entire picture' with a JCBA that pays the 360+ seat airplane more than any other.
LEAVE THE JCBA OUT OF THE SLI ARGUMENTS.