[QUOTE=jsled;993021]
Originally Posted by
dogger
Not at all. The SLI method is spelled out in the merger policy. A timely SLI has always been the policy (until now), so that the company cannot furlough one side and grow the other. IOW, we need to NOT be operated separately. What if UCH decides to open a 737 base in DEN? Should UAL pilots be able to bid it? What about an Airbus domicile in IAH? You wouldn't mind not being able to bid on that would you? It would be nice to have a SLI in place before these shenanigans begin. Even without a JCBA. If you think pay banding was divisive.................
I have sat in on Union meetings as of late. As I understand, the CAL side scope clause prevents the above scenarios explicitly (not vaguely as the 70 seat issue at hand). UAL scope does not have protection from these scenarios. The TP&A was created to mostly protect the UAL pilots from the above. Unfortunately, most of these protections expire at the end of 2011. That was the longest period of time that management would agree to. If the agreement had not been signed, the furloughs, whipsaw and such might have already started. When I asked, what was the major delay in contract negotiations, we were told that the banding issue ate up over 4 to 5 months of negotiating time. Although I am not happy about the situation, I don't have any control or input. We need a contract now!!!! And not just any contract, an industry leading contract!!!