Originally Posted by LifeNtheFstLne (Post 806320)

The snapshot WAS NOT taken yet, fyi.

Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG (Post 806372)

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

Originally Posted by NuGuy (Post 806384)

Not really true. In most mergers, including the NW/DL merger, the date the merger was announced was considered "constructive notification", and the SLI was based around that.

For you guys, that was Monday.

Nu

Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 806387)

Career expectations as well as longevity(NOT DOH) have weight. CAL has 10x more career expectations.

Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 806387)

I am trying to be neutral by saying the only fair way is relative seniority. I would personally like the career expectations heavily weighted, but figure the only way we will ever come to an agreement is straight relative seniority.

Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 806341)

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.

Originally Posted by jsled (Post 806445)

Do you know why the top 517 slots went to US Airways in the America West merger? Because of the widebody disparities between the 2 airlines. You are right, relative seniority is fair....within aircraft types. 111 Widebodies vs 46 widebodies is going to be addressed with more UAL pilots than CAL pilots slotted in the top of the list-just like US AIR/ Am West. CAL, with more narrowbodies will see more favorable slotting in that part of the list. JMHO

Originally Posted by cactusdog16 (Post 806437)

Thor:

With all due respect, you need to understand what UAL is bringing to the table (again, twice as many WBs as CAL and a huge international presence) and admit to yourself that the UAL pilots do have significant career expectations. Just because CAL's current upgrade time is shorter than UAL's does not mean that the career expectation of a UAL pilot is "nada," or even that "CAL's is 10x UAL's." That is simply ridiculous.

Aren't you salivating just a little at the prospect of your airline's widebody fleet tripling in size?? C'mon, you can admit it! Better pay! More days off! Who wouldn't like that? And now you want to jump ahead of all those United pilots who have been waiting in line for the higher paying, better quality-of-life equipment?



Straight relative seniority would place you closer to the higher-paying, better QOL equipment than you have ever been. It would place me further away than I have ever been since being a new-hire well over a decade ago. How would that be fair? If the fleet types of our two companies were more closely aligned, I would say straight relative seniority would be a go. But they're not. And it's not.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 806450)

These are very realistic expecations.

Furloughs will be placed on the bottom as they are not on property. Sucks, but that's the way it is.



As far as the snapshot, it was yesterday.

Originally Posted by AAflyer (Post 806458)

How does it take into account pilots that have the seniority to hold wide-body positions, but fly narrow body for QOL?


Thanks

AA