CAL scope
09-03-2008 | 05:52 AM
#61
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Thank you for clearing that up! Too much speculation on everybody's part without any information on the LOA itself.
The LOA (Joint Venture Flying) dealt specifically with revenue/profit sharing with a domestic carrier on international routes. Currently CAL can do about 80% of what they want to do in this arena with foreign carriers. i.e. Lufthansa, AirCanada. (STAR Alliance)
Furthermore, the LOA provided language that protected CAL pilot's flying, equipment and jobs. This provision would actually be an enhancement to the Scope section of the CBA.
In return the company was willing to carry the furloughs and provide "No Furlough" protection for everyone currently on property. Also, return of the crew rest seat to Business First and agreement that the IRO's would start working both ways on any pairings that required an IRO. Furthermore, the sunset date on the current profit sharing provisions would be extended one year. There is also is a provision for a 2% pay raise when two triggers are met. (Remember, all of this would be outside of the normal Section 6 negotiations.)
The company was willing to pay a premium for what they wanted and that included carrying those projected to be furloughed per the current business plan.
THe LOA was supported and recommended by all the MEC Officers including the EVP, Negotiating Committee, Merger Committee, Alliance Oversight, ALPA National E&FA, Negotiating Counsel and SCOPE Counsel.
This is a very rough synopsis of the LOA and provisions. The MEC decided to ignore the recommendations and voted 7-2 against the LOA.
-SLAM55
The LOA (Joint Venture Flying) dealt specifically with revenue/profit sharing with a domestic carrier on international routes. Currently CAL can do about 80% of what they want to do in this arena with foreign carriers. i.e. Lufthansa, AirCanada. (STAR Alliance)
Furthermore, the LOA provided language that protected CAL pilot's flying, equipment and jobs. This provision would actually be an enhancement to the Scope section of the CBA.
In return the company was willing to carry the furloughs and provide "No Furlough" protection for everyone currently on property. Also, return of the crew rest seat to Business First and agreement that the IRO's would start working both ways on any pairings that required an IRO. Furthermore, the sunset date on the current profit sharing provisions would be extended one year. There is also is a provision for a 2% pay raise when two triggers are met. (Remember, all of this would be outside of the normal Section 6 negotiations.)
The company was willing to pay a premium for what they wanted and that included carrying those projected to be furloughed per the current business plan.
THe LOA was supported and recommended by all the MEC Officers including the EVP, Negotiating Committee, Merger Committee, Alliance Oversight, ALPA National E&FA, Negotiating Counsel and SCOPE Counsel.
This is a very rough synopsis of the LOA and provisions. The MEC decided to ignore the recommendations and voted 7-2 against the LOA.
-SLAM55
09-03-2008 | 06:38 AM
#62
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 990
Likes: 68
That LOA had so many holes in it. If oil goes above 170, or if Larry Kellner wakes up on the wrong side of the bed all bets are off. The company gets to keep the LOA and we lose everything. You think Slam is MF? I hope he and the rest of the NC are on their way out.
By the way did you hear about the IAH ACP telling a furloughed pilot to "enjoy his furlough".
By the way did you hear about the IAH ACP telling a furloughed pilot to "enjoy his furlough".
09-03-2008 | 07:41 AM
#64
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 534
Likes: 15
From: 18%er but I’ll enforce UPA23 to the last period.
what did we learn from this though? first class seating and IRO both ways is attainable for us (and should be, look at DAL, they have it, as does AA). the company seems to think they can make it work in up to $170 a barrel jet A. good, pay me. a 2% raise is an insult. come talk to me when it is a 2 digit raise number and the first number is larger than 2. finally, there needs to be some sort of penalty to the company for violating the cba.
09-03-2008 | 07:44 AM
#65
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 990
Likes: 68
No K.K. The furloughed pilot happened to pass K.K. in the crewroom along with two Captains. K.K. mentioned to the furloughed pilot that if the union would have passed the LOA then he wouldn't be furloughed. The furloughed pilot stated that the LOA didn't seem to be a good deal, and he was glad the union didn't pass it. K.K. responded with "enjoy your furlough".
09-03-2008 | 07:53 AM
#66
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
ding ding ding! we have a winner. much like the furlough mitigation LOA and C'02 there are far too many outs for kellner and his band of fuel hedging idiots to do what they feel.
what did we learn from this though? first class seating and IRO both ways is attainable for us (and should be, look at DAL, they have it, as does AA). the company seems to think they can make it work in up to $170 a barrel jet A. good, pay me. a 2% raise is an insult. come talk to me when it is a 2 digit raise number and the first number is larger than 2. finally, there needs to be some sort of penalty to the company for violating the cba.
what did we learn from this though? first class seating and IRO both ways is attainable for us (and should be, look at DAL, they have it, as does AA). the company seems to think they can make it work in up to $170 a barrel jet A. good, pay me. a 2% raise is an insult. come talk to me when it is a 2 digit raise number and the first number is larger than 2. finally, there needs to be some sort of penalty to the company for violating the cba.
09-03-2008 | 10:32 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
From: Capt. B737
K.K. responded with "enjoy your furlough".
If there were witnesses, I hope this is forwarded to someone who can set this straight. Truly classless. Why do we get these types in there. It wouldn't happen under C.J.'s watch. Boy, do I miss those days. Actually getting help from the CPO office. I wish the furloghee was here a few years earlier. Even in present conditions, he would have been laid off with a little dignity. Due to the reduced staffing levels, has the CPO endured any reductions????
09-03-2008 | 11:03 AM
#68
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 610
Likes: 14
From: The Right One
One does not upgrade because CFI's are coming up the pipeline, one upgrades because people with smaller seniority numbers leave the company, quit or retire, in static fleet conditions. One can also upgrade faster also when the fleet expands in # and/or utilization, normally.
I will agree, that the most improtant people on the seniority list are those below you/me, they are a sign of growth and progress, and they give us a safety buffer when things go to crap. It's not personal, it's just bid-ness.
SD
09-03-2008 | 11:26 AM
#69
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 990
Likes: 68
Absolutely unbelieveable. If there were witnesses, I hope this is forwarded to someone who can set this straight. Truly classless. Why do we get these types in there. It wouldn't happen under C.J.'s watch. Boy, do I miss those days. Actually getting help from the CPO office. I wish the furloghee was here a few years earlier. Even in present conditions, he would have been laid off with a little dignity. Due to the reduced staffing levels, has the CPO endured any reductions????
If there were witnesses, I hope this is forwarded to someone who can set this straight. Truly classless. Why do we get these types in there. It wouldn't happen under C.J.'s watch. Boy, do I miss those days. Actually getting help from the CPO office. I wish the furloghee was here a few years earlier. Even in present conditions, he would have been laid off with a little dignity. Due to the reduced staffing levels, has the CPO endured any reductions????I will say that Cal management is doing their best to get our pilot group to band together. With PBS, the furlough, POS 02, and **** poor treatment by middle management this pilot group might actually stand together and fight for something.
09-03-2008 | 01:35 PM
#70
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: B756 Captain
Secondly, specifically what outs do you see with the Joint Venture Flying LOA that was proposed?
Are CAL pilots better off today without the enhancements of No Furlough, no reduction in BES, no reduction of flying, no reduction of aircraft certificated at 125 seats or greater?
-SLAMM55
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
