Scope has been the CAL pilot's #1 priority in current negotiations, that will not change. (and it seems to me the UAL pilots feel similarly)
Even if CAL's small jet scope can not be completely retained, Don't forget DAL/NWA got a no-furlough clause from the date of completion.
2 years only, I know but we can do better. Why not back to the permanent no-furlough clauses that existed before 9/11? A 5 year one at the min?

Combined fleet...

Boeing
747-400...........26
777-200...........72
767-400...........16
767-300...........35
767-200...........10
757-300...........21
757-200...........138
737-900ER........30
737-900...........12
737-800...........117
737-700...........36
737-500...........40

Airbus
320.................97
319.................55

This was never an issue for United. I don't see how adding Continental to the mix would change things for SKW.

Continental currently uses regionals that fly for Continental's competition. Heck, Continental still uses a regional that gave them bad press, dragged them in front of a congressional firing-line, and contributed to the death of some of their customers.:eek:

Here's hoping CAL/UAL pilots do all of their branded flying in the future.

Yea, 2 year furlough protection is a joke, because that is how long it will take after the official merger date at the end of this year to merge the airlines operationally. To me, that's "zero" year furlough protection. I'd rather see no furloughs. Age 65 will kick in soon after the merger is complete. Add some early retirements (I know guys are worried about pensions and lump sums with a merger). I wish we could dump the scabs from both airlines too. Too bad ALPA forgave them. If we lose on the scope issue, the pilot jobs lost will be huge. We can't budge on the scope. All 50+ seat jts will be mainline. :D

How the Continental-United deal went down
 

This reporter was the first (and maybe only) one to call out Smisek on his "no salary or bonus" line of BS a few months ago.

http://blogs.chron.com/lorensteffy/2...oren+Steffy%29


How the Continental-United deal went down | Loren Steffy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

May 03, 2010

How the Continental-United deal went down

In the end, ( http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/6986235.html ) the biggest airline merger in U.S. history came together in three weeks. Continental and United had danced two years ago and decided against combining. But just months after Jeff Smisek took over as CEO of Continental, things changed.

United, which had previously invited Continental to join the Star Alliance, once again began making merger overtures with US Airways. On April 9, which happened to be United CEO Glenn Tilton's birthday, :rolleyes: Smisek called him.
"You're headed down a path that I think might not be optimal," Tilton said Smisek told him.
United quickly threw aside USAir for Continental. From there, the deal moved fast because the two airlines already knew each other so well.
"Time is the enemy of deals," Tilton said. "We had to go to work fast. This deal came together at warp speed."
Now, employees, customers and shareholders are trying to assess what the two executives have wrought. Wall Street, of course, loves the deal, but then it always does. Bankers, after all, get to collect fees and walk away. Smisek insisted that concern for long-suffering shareholders was a big driver behind the deal.
"Both Glenn and I have done a terrible job returning value to our shareholders," he said.

But as I note in today's column, ( http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...y/6986668.html ) history is against him. Airline mergers rarely generate lasting value for investors.
Smisek and Tilton argue the merger is predicated heavily on revenue. That is, they hope to improve the mix of business travelers and increase the new United's overall profitability by attracting higher paying passengers. It's unclear whether that will offset the costs.
Airline mergers historically don't generate the savings that executives predict, and in this case, Continental, which hasn't been through bankruptcy since the mid-1990s, has one of the highest cost structures in the industry.
Smisek said the deal will lower costs and make the new United more competitive, both internationally and with low-cost carriers at home.
But the competition is stiff. The 2008 merger of Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines, both of whom had been through bankruptcy, has created what will be the No. 2 airline with lower costs than either Continental or United have now. In other words, the biggest rival to the new United may still have a competitive advantage.
In the airline business, the carrier with the lowest costs tends to win.





Posted by Loren at May 3, 2010 11:23 AM

Amen to that. UAL used to be THE airline to fly for before the current UAL CEO and the last one started to outsource most of their domestic flying to the lowest bidder like Mesa, TSA, SKW, CHQ etc and slash pilot salaries and positions.

Where the capacity cuts are
 

Uh, the cuts have already happened.

You know... 100 airplanes and 1400 United pilots.:mad:

Not so sure that UAL was ever THE airline to fly, but wasn't that right after UAL pilots pushed pilot compensation way beyond reasonable relative to competitors, by holding customers hostage for an entire summer, only to ink a contract that overlooked scope? What did you expect?

and more importantly, SHOULD WE LEARN FROM THE PAST?

Contract 2000 held scope to 50 seaters and tied them to mainline a/c just like CAL. It was the bankruptcy contract of 2003 that allowed 70 seaters.

Ah...sorry. Thanks for the correction, but I remember a lot of bad press directed at and about pilots during the contract 2000 negotiation period, especially in the local Chicago media.

Yes. Lots of bad press. Pilots were ****ed about the pending US Air merger after 7 years of ESOP wages. They wanted a payraise, not a merger. Things did not go well operationally that summer. ;) The resulting contractual payrates were called "obscene" by Mr. Bethune. I can remember in Aug 02, SWA got a 20% payraise from $140 to $169/hr for 12 year captains. $169 was my exact rate at the time....as a 5th year F/O. Heady days!!

This is just great.

Our pay raises in 2000 were essentially a cola from our esop pay cut of 1994. Sorry, but I wasn't about to pay for the ESOP twice.

Holding customers hostage? ALPA told United well in advance that they did not have enough pilots to fly their summer schedule. If I remember correctly, that was quite an active summer for weather. The mechanics were also in contract talks at the same time. Hence, plane no fixie, plane no flyie.

Please educate yourself before you assign complete fault for the summer of love to the pilots of United.

no evidence .................................................. ..............................

Yea, but I'm talking future. 150 more planes and 1800 more pilots of UAL/CAL. Add that to the 1500 UAL/CAL pilots already furloughed. :eek:

Deleted.........

The "Black Book"
 

The real question I wanna ask is this. What happens when a CAL guy shows up for a flight and the UAL guy finds him in his SCAB book? Will the flight be cancelled? Or will there just be a fist fight to settle it right there in the cockpit? Then will it be quiet?

I can't wait to see what really happens in these cockpits that the media isn't reporting about this merger!

Seriously, we have more important issues in front of us than that.

There are plenty of UAL scabs also. Technically the ones at CAL were 'forgiven' when we joined ALPA.

I think logistically, because of seniority, that there wont be too much comingling. Im sure issues will arise, but not enough to make news. I guess it will be similar to when any other UAL pilot flies with a UAL scab.

As far as Captain Bligh.....sheesh, no time to comment. If you arent managment, then you are an FOF, 83 hire or a 15 year old Japanese kid playing with his dad's computer halfway around the world. :)

Guys,

I wouldn't worry about furloughs due to the merger - that aint gonna happen. The unions have more clout now with this deal pending then they ever did - furloughs will definitely be off the table. If the unions are not actively on board with big grins all around some of the Wall Street glee will dissolve - bad for management bonuses. Also, as stated earlier it will take a couple of years to put the pieces together.

The real threat is shrinking through attrition once retirements start to kick in. The only way to prevent that is rock solid scope. I'm sure the unions will want some job protection assurances (maybe a 2-3 year no furlough clause or could be a financial/scope penalty for furloughs). But the unions can not put a restriction on retirements and that is how management will reduce capacity (if that is their goal) via attrition. While not as bad as furloughs - stagnation is not good either.

Scoop

List question
 

Can anyone give my an idea what status a CAL pilot would be at about 53 percentile of the list?:rolleyes:

73 Capt. Any base. Our (non existent) work rules suck, so our seat and aircraft bids are very inconsistent with stuff going far more junior than it would at a typical carrier. Ex: I would NEVER hold 757/767 anywhere else at my seniority. It's just THAT bad.

Yeah, thats easy - he would be in the middle. :D

Scoop

Thanks for the reply.

FYI, at that level at UAL I am a top 10-15% 76/75 FO at any base or I could be a bottom lineholder 320 CAP at any base exept DEN(on resreve) or bottom lineholder/senior reserve 747 or 777 any base except SEA.

Yesterdays Gone
 

It kind of reminds one of the lyrics to an old song "...but that was yesterday and yesterday's gone". (Heavy emphasis on the word "gone").

It was true but one will never see those days again...just like Contract 2000. Sweet, but never to be seen again.

G'Luck with the marriage ladies & gentlemen. It should work in my view, especially if a housecleaning occurs in Chicago.

G'Day Mates:)

lots of talks about the RJ scope issues,
let's not forget to put an end to that air lingus JV.. let s make sure mgt doesn't get away with that

completely agree.

How many guys are based in SEA? I thought it was less than 50... And is it a 320 base? Just curious. In 30 years I could probably hold it.

I believe, (that means I read it on a web board), that the CAL contract has a provision preventing JV's.

There was talk about how the joint venture with UAL needed to be signed off by the CAL pilot group. Would this clause help prevent the Air Lingus deal?

Fingers crossed...

More than fifty but not by much. No 320 base in SEA. 767 and 777 only.

14 plus years to be the bottom guy on the 767.

Thanks, I knew it had changed a lot from when I was younger, but I wasn't sure by how much. I'll trade you EWR for SEA. Deal? Everyone loves the sweet smell of marinara and urine, right?

Sorry, I'm staying in ORD. It's only a 45 minute drive :D

Now there's a novel idea, 'living' in base!!:D

I need to try that sometime.

Anyone care to bet on where the new centralized training center will be?

I'll buy DENVER for $500

Isn't the Denver one big enough? Why get a new one?

One thing's for certain.....IAH present ops (training facility) couldn't handle 1/2 of the required training for the new carrier.

UAL has been trying to sell TK in DEN. I'm guessing you guys have the same kind of thing in IAH. Wonder which one will survive?

If that's the case, they better get to some crack'in on building more than we have down in IAH presently!

I'm with Otto....if DEN already has the structure, use it.

Nice to hear you gave up. A good contract is never to be seen again? Why? Shouldn't 11,000 pilots go and get a good contract?

Tilton and friends may not be helping UAL, but Smisek is a slimy lawyer who hates pilots, so don't expect much from him either. It's up to us to make it good- no one else.

The DEN facility is currently under utilized, so maybe they will bring that back up to full strength. If so, first round's on me at Fero's.