Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
Mergers and Acquisitions Facts, rumors, and conjecture
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-04-2010, 01:39 PM   #41  
Recommend Retention
 
LifeNtheFstLne's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Bigfoot
Posts: 1,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alfaromeo View Post
ALPA Merger Policy was changed last year. There are three factors to consider in building the list. This is not a priority list (the first one listed isn't necessarily the most important) and there is no weight given to any factor. They are:

1. Status and category
2. Longevity
3. Career expectations

So longevity, or date of hire, is a consideration.
Longevity and date of hire are not interchangeable terms. One can easily have many years since they were hired and only a few of them be active (ex: UAL guys that have been furloughed twice). There seems to be much confusion over this. Longevity for pay purposes is contract specific.
LifeNtheFstLne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 01:45 PM   #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Fero's
Posts: 467
Default

Can anyone confirm, or deny, that the dissenting opinion of the Nicolau Award was written by a member of the CAL Merger Committee?
chuckyt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 01:49 PM   #43  
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
SoCalGuy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh View Post
Not to mention the fact that if you do get a copy of SoCal's relative list, the first thing you may notice is that there are CAL pilots on the list that were born in 1938, a few in 1942... I doubt that the list holds any more credibility than the straight DOH list.
Your right Bligh.....

There's a '38, '39, '41, '42, and two '44s figured/included into the list you refer too (D.O.B.). That's a TOTAL of 6 pilots when dealing with 11,000+ slots between the two list's....my bad! Now I was never a math-whiz, but I can tell you first hand that .0005% (the equivalent of 6 slots factored into the 11+K) is a pretty "small" number. I'll can speak to the 'architect' of the sketch, and I'm sure he can remove those 'pilots' if it makes things sit better for you.

As I expressed earlier, this model in which you refer too Bligh is NOT MEANT to be the "end all to be all solution". It's just a "ROUGH" sketch of what Relative Seniority means/pertains when looking at the two groups. This list is not expect to used as a science/carbon copy, it's just a cog in the wheel of a 'think tank' while the SLI is being discussed.....nothing more.
SoCalGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 01:52 PM   #44  
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
SoCalGuy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LifeNtheFstLne View Post
Longevity and date of hire are not interchangeable terms. One can easily have many years since they were hired and only a few of them be active (ex: UAL guys that have been furloughed twice). There seems to be much confusion over this. Longevity for pay purposes is contract specific.
I think the term you maybe looking for is "Year's of Service"??.....Actually being active on property.

Just a guess....could be wrong.
SoCalGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 02:05 PM   #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 73 CA EWR
Posts: 514
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckyt1 View Post
Can anyone confirm, or deny, that the dissenting opinion of the Nicolau Award was written by a member of the CAL Merger Committee?
Yes. Don't you just love it?
Blockoutblockin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 03:41 PM   #46  
Banned
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cactusdog16 View Post
The main reason for relative seniority being on one side of the windfall spectrum is the preponderance of widebodies at UAL and career expectations. Roughly 58% of UAL's fleet are widebodies (if you include the 757 in that mix as it is flown as the same fleet as the 767), while only 31% of CAL's current fleet is widebody (again, including their 757s). A pilot who is halfway up UAL's seniority list is much closer to a more lucrative widebody position than a pilot who is half way up CAL's seniority list. If you merge simply by relative seniority, all CAL pilots are much closer to the higher paying equipment, while all UAL pilots are further away than they were pre-merger, or even bumped off. Simply stated, UAL is bringing mostly widebodies to the merger, while CAL is bringing mostly narrowbodies.

Even fences will not fix this problem as most of us who are under 60 are in this for the long haul. No one is going to put up a 25-year fence.

Strict date-of-hire would not be fair either, as UAL's most junior active pilot (after the Tilton furlough) is several years senior to the most junior CAL Captain.

As many have already said, it will not be strict DOH or strict relative seniority, but some conglomeration of both along with several other factors.
Boy you've got this all screwed up. CAL's career expectation are 10x that of UAL pilots. Yes there are more widebodies at UAL, but years to upgrade are 500 times sooner then those at UAL. UALs career expectations are pretty much nada. UAL will fence the 747 and CAL will need to fence upgrades for 10 years. A 2005 hire at CAL is less then 40% on the FO over all list.
thor2j is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 03:41 PM   #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
LeeFXDWG's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LifeNtheFstLne View Post
Longevity and date of hire are not interchangeable terms. One can easily have many years since they were hired and only a few of them be active (ex: UAL guys that have been furloughed twice). There seems to be much confusion over this. Longevity for pay purposes is contract specific.
You are correct. UA does have furloughs with greater longevity than your most junior Capt in EWR.

I'm a voluntary furlough that really doesn't have an intention of going back. Having said that and if my intention was to return, with 12+ years UA longevity where would you put me on the list? I have recall rights for 10 years, and they mean that I expect a fair integration that respects my active service when the most junior guy/gal at CAL was worried about their acne problem.

To suggest that a furloughed pilot with more active time at UA goes below the most junior CAL pilot won't work anymore than DOH or strict relative seniority.

ALPA changed the policy for that reason to avoid the whole US AIR fiasco. Would I expect to have a number far higher than CALs junior EWR Capt. Yes. Would they be seat protected, yes, until whatever action happened to bump them then their seniority would dictate their next bid, well below me or any other person with much greater active service.

This will be interesting to watch. Glad I'm on the outside looking in.

Frats
Lee
LeeFXDWG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 03:42 PM   #48  
Banned
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalGuy View Post
I think the term you maybe looking for is "Year's of Service"??.....Actually being active on property.

Just a guess....could be wrong.
Longevity, as per ALPA merger policy is time you were actually an active employee.
thor2j is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 03:48 PM   #49  
Banned
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cactusdog16 View Post
The main reason for relative seniority being on one side of the windfall spectrum is the preponderance of widebodies at UAL and career expectations. Roughly 58% of UAL's fleet are widebodies (if you include the 757 in that mix as it is flown as the same fleet as the 767), while only 31% of CAL's current fleet is widebody (again, including their 757s). A pilot who is halfway up UAL's seniority list is much closer to a more lucrative widebody position than a pilot who is half way up CAL's seniority list. If you merge simply by relative seniority, all CAL pilots are much closer to the higher paying equipment, while all UAL pilots are further away than they were pre-merger, or even bumped off. Simply stated, UAL is bringing mostly widebodies to the merger, while CAL is bringing mostly narrowbodies.

Even fences will not fix this problem as most of us who are under 60 are in this for the long haul. No one is going to put up a 25-year fence.

Strict date-of-hire would not be fair either, as UAL's most junior active pilot (after the Tilton furlough) is several years senior to the most junior CAL Captain.

As many have already said, it will not be strict DOH or strict relative seniority, but some conglomeration of both along with several other factors.
The other problem with your "lucrative theory" is CAL 738 and 739 (which are the majority) pay better then UAL 75/76.
thor2j is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 04:09 PM   #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Fritzthepilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thor2j View Post
Boy you've got this all screwed up. CAL's career expectation are 10x that of UAL pilots. Yes there are more widebodies at UAL, but years to upgrade are 500 times sooner then those at UAL. UALs career expectations are pretty much nada. UAL will fence the 747 and CAL will need to fence upgrades for 10 years. A 2005 hire at CAL is less then 40% on the FO over all list.
You speak in nice general terms like UAL career expectations is "nada," and then you think you are justified to fence upgrades for 10 years? I was a Captain for 4 years and expect to be back in the left seat in the next 2-3 yrs. I wouldn't call that nada.
Fritzthepilot is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Continental Seniority FloatGeek Major 33 01-14-2011 06:41 AM
Seniority question angelicm3 Regional 15 05-29-2006 04:44 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:46 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1