Originally Posted by 30west

Someone, is starting to see the forest (banding of fleets) instead of the big tree (747).

Best observation on this thread so far. This isn't about 747 its just the best example since its greatly different from 767-4.In this particular band.

I'll take it a step further to help others see whats this is disagreement is really about(merger cmmttes wont tip their cards). In past mergers (did some work on merger cmmte in former airline) of airlines one of the important factors arbitrators look at is how many wide-bodies(2 aisles) and how many narrow-bodies(1 aisle) does each merging airline bring. It establishes a ratio for use by the arbitrator, also usually a black and white number. But I bet Mr. Katz is throwing one out there on this deal hoping it sticks. If he can convince the arbitrators(3 this time) that since the pay is the same on (proposed CAL banding ) 747/777/767-4 and 767-2/767-3/757 etops this would greatly change the WB/NB ratio. Goes from what it really is 48 WB CAL/ 113 WB UAL to 110 WB CAL for pay/ 113+?(757 etops) WB UAL for pay. Makes the ratio much closer to even ,vastly improving CAL pilot position on SLI integration. IMHO I don't think you will get three separate arbitrators to set new precedent on this but I would have tried it also if I were on the committee.

30 west