Airline Pilot Central Forums - Merged CAL/UAL seniority lists

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Mergers and Acquisitions (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mergers-acquisitions/)

- - Merged CAL/UAL seniority lists (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mergers-acquisitions/4713-merged-cal-ual-seniority-lists.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 806297)

The other problem with your "lucrative theory" is CAL 738 and 739 (which are the majority) pay better then UAL 75/76.

Payrates have nothing to do with SLI. Yes, aircraft types and positions at PDI when the snapshot is taken. It is assumed that a JCBA will take care of that issue. Career expectations address where pilot x would have ended their career had the merger never occured.

Lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG (Post 806314)

The snapshot WAS NOT taken yet, fyi.

Your theoretical 'pilot X' is a furloughed UAL guy, who will return much faster with this merger than if UAL had gone it alone.(Just my opinion). I think you're overestimating the weight that active years of service will carry. Here's hoping we're all equally hosed. The true definition of fairness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG (Post 806287)

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

Can't say for the volunteered furlough, but as most people will tell you furloughees will not go ahead of ANY active pilots. It just doesn't happen. CAL ALPA is saying they will will not settle for anything less then relative seniority+career expectations. And I am sure UAL ALPA is saying the opposite. Relative seniority is the only fair integration for both sides, if you are 50% you stay 50%. How much fairer can you get.

The dissenting opinion that was written in the Nicalau award was apparently written by Continental's now merger committee chairman stating that he thought I believe longevity should be considered when it wasn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 806195)

So longevity, or date of hire, is a consideration.

Longevity isn't DoH.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishfreighter (Post 806345)

Longevity isn't DoH.

No, but if you've never had any gaps in employment, for all practical purposes it IS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LifeNtheFstLne (Post 806320)

Wrong, PID occurs when the governing MECs determine that a viable merger will be consummated. I know UA is already beginning the employment history verification process. I can only assume CAL is doing the same. Sounds like the PID process and snapshot is being taken my friend.

Will longevity carry weight in this merger, yes. It is the new policy. Sorry you don't like that fact. But you are right. Everyone will be ****ed equally in a perfect world. And, my pilot x could be from either carrier. You assume bias on my part where I have none.

IMO, had Tilton not played it the the way he did UA would have been gone in a year or two. That opinion doesn't weigh into the current events nor the SLI process since no one was chap 7. In fact UAs cash on hand and margins blew away the industry last quarter. Does that make CAL the distressed partner. No. No more so than your position or mine means UA was gone in 2 years.

Go to the ALPA website and read the merger policy with an objective view.

Frats
Lee

Am I correct in assuming that, one of the reasons Bruscia's dissenting opinion carried so little weight was that to weight longevity in a merger too heavily might allow leapfrogging within the seniority list because of things like illness or leaves? Nobody wants to open that can of worms and then merge two lists at the same time do they?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishfreighter (Post 806345)

Longevity isn't DoH.

Repeat,

longevity is not DOH

Quote:

Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 806341)

I have no doubt CAL ALPA is saying that. Now, go read the the active merger policy available on the ALPA website. Then, approach the process from a neutral standpoint. Better yet, read the USAIR Nicolau ruling and read CALs own pilot member and his issues with the determination for failing to take longevity into account. Believe his name is Bruschia.

Then come back and try again. You guys set the stage for the new policy. BTW, I believe he is on your merger commitee as well.

Lee