Merged CAL/UAL seniority lists
05-04-2010, 09:38 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by jsled
No crack needed. You have 46 widebodies. Do you think it's fair to do straight r/s if half of UAL's w/b captains end up junior to CAL 737 captains? I believe this integration will take into account Status and Category...at least thats what ALPA merger policy says.
e. The merger representatives shall carefully weigh all the equities inherent in their merger situation. In joint session, the merger representatives should attempt to match equities to various methods of integration until a fair and equitable integrated seniority list is reached. Factors to be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list, in no particular order and with no particular weight, shall include but not be limited to the following:
(1) Career Expectations.
(2) Longevity.
(3) Status and category.
e. The merger representatives shall carefully weigh all the equities inherent in their merger situation. In joint session, the merger representatives should attempt to match equities to various methods of integration until a fair and equitable integrated seniority list is reached. Factors to be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list, in no particular order and with no particular weight, shall include but not be limited to the following:
(1) Career Expectations.
(2) Longevity.
(3) Status and category.
There's no sense in everyone throwing stones on here or anywhere as it won't matter a damn what you think. The majority does not rule in an SLI.
If we get all wound up and ****y with each other over the SLI, which we don't really have any control over and won't be voting on, how are we going to fight together to get a kick ass JCBA?
We have a BIG fight ahead of us. King Smisek has nocturnal emissions over 70 seat jets flown by Colgan and Gulfstream. He's been salivating over that for a while now. It's one of the many lame-ass reasons for the Delta + $1 BS they threw at us. We need to focus on what we can control and let the merger committees do their thing.
05-04-2010, 09:54 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: EMB-145
Posts: 427
Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r
If a NON-ALPA carrier merges with a ALPA represented carrier, then ALPA National will provide all the Legal assistance needed.
TWA and AMR is one example where that did not really happen. There are many stories as to why.
TWA and AMR is one example where that did not really happen. There are many stories as to why.
I work on a National committee, but like the ALPA merger policy, all we can do is pass recommendations. We can't force any MEC to do what we want. This goes for all committees. If the Executive Council votes to change something such as dues percentage or what is considered "income", it takes a ratification procedure through reps of all airlines. Mergers don't rise to that level of action.
As for what happened at TWA, I think ALPA National could have provided more legal assets but, IMHO, the legal guys told them it would have been a waste of money so they backed off. The rest was what the TWA MEC and the APA BOD negotiated. It appears up to 1100 of the most senior TWA pilots did okay according to the link below.
Even the TWA guys can't keep their story straight about what happened so it's understandable how no one else can know understand it either: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ma...tml#post800401
05-04-2010, 10:14 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,482
A320, yoiu make me laugh. You act like like UAL will stay on their payscale after the merger. You will have a joint contract in a year and those whales will pay a lot more than your 767.
You were angry at being placed below AWA pilots when you spent most of your time at US Air furloughed? GMAFB. Now you are trying to get ahead of UAL pilots that have been flying larger equipment for a lot longer than you have been employed at CAL. Hey, at least you made a good career move.
There will be little need for fences because the SLI will allot the widebody seats according to what is in the fleet mix now. You can bank on that. Just like the US Air East pilots got the top 517 slots in the Nicolau award due to their vast fleet of 6 A330 and 10 767s UAL will get most of the top slots in a ratio of UAL widebodys to CAL widebodys. Then the next group will be ratioed and so on down to the 737 and A320 fleets. Look at how the arbitration rulings have gone and that is how your deal will go down.
You were angry at being placed below AWA pilots when you spent most of your time at US Air furloughed? GMAFB. Now you are trying to get ahead of UAL pilots that have been flying larger equipment for a lot longer than you have been employed at CAL. Hey, at least you made a good career move.
There will be little need for fences because the SLI will allot the widebody seats according to what is in the fleet mix now. You can bank on that. Just like the US Air East pilots got the top 517 slots in the Nicolau award due to their vast fleet of 6 A330 and 10 767s UAL will get most of the top slots in a ratio of UAL widebodys to CAL widebodys. Then the next group will be ratioed and so on down to the 737 and A320 fleets. Look at how the arbitration rulings have gone and that is how your deal will go down.
05-04-2010, 10:41 PM
#84
New Hire
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 5
Thank you!
Originally Posted by A320fumes
I don't mean to offend Dog. But IMHO, expectation doesn't hold much water in a UAL/CAL fight. I expected to be an A-330 CA at USAir by now when I left the USAF for them in '98. In 15 years, I would like to be a reserve, by choice, 757/A-320 CA who flies once every 90 days. Career expectations are just like derivatives, smoke and mirrors. I was a 737 CA when I got activated this time last year. If I keep my relative Sr, that's what I'll be after the SLI. With regard to the furloughs, been there done that. With regard to career expectations vs a UAL furloughee, I KNOW I can expect 76hrs, reserve, by choice, pay @ $108/ hr, next Thursday at midnight. What can a furloughee expect?
From me a furloughee can expect that I will not fly one second over guarrantee or have 1 minute more than a month's sick time until they are made whole.
From me a furloughee can expect that I will not fly one second over guarrantee or have 1 minute more than a month's sick time until they are made whole.
A320 Been where you have been. Am not where you are at. Thank you for you last statement. To others that dismiss furloughees...very disappointing. I guess it is all about me, isn't it?
CC
05-04-2010, 10:47 PM
#85
New Hire
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 5
New math?
Originally Posted by thor2j
Your turn to read again. Furloughs have no active status and therefore will go to the BOTTOM. Sorry, but proven over and over. Career expectations as well as longevity(NOT DOH) have weight. CAL has 10x more career expectations. 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. Don't forget most 2005 CAL hires have more longevity (aka active time) then most UAL furloughs.
Thor,
I am a UAL furloughee, about a third from the top, I know I'll get hosed. It is a career expectation. However, good sir, I know for fact I have more time on property at UAL than a 2005 CAL hire--even after 7 months on furlough. Not that it really matters to you...
Enjoy your career...fellow professional.
CC
05-05-2010, 03:18 AM
#86
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: Up Front
Posts: 286
Originally Posted by Beagle Pilot
It appears up to 1100 of the most senior TWA pilots did okay according to the link below.
[/url]
Going from a relative 40% on the original list to a relative 91% on the combined list, and going from Captain to furlough in 11 months is not what I would call doing "OK".
EXTW
05-05-2010, 04:46 AM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
[QUOTE=A320fumes;806523]
320, this is not about you or me. I would retire around #150 if UAL stayed independent. I fully expect that number to increase by the 100's once the dust settles on this sli. DAL/NWA used 4 categories: w/b captains, n/b captains, w/b first officers, n/b first officers. This methodology used the number of positions in each category brought to the arbitration. Relative seniority within category and status. Yes there were fences around each group's premium a/c, but 5 yr fences...not 25 years. That's silly. I expect our arbitrated sli will closely resemble the NWA/DAL award. But as Mr. Fluf says, it 'don't matta' what I think, whatever happens, happens. We will have to live with it. What we need to focus on is the JCBA!!
Originally Posted by jsled
No crack needed. You have 46 wide bodies. Do you think it's fair to do straight r/s if half of UAL's w/b captains end up junior to CAL 737 captains? I believe this integration will take into account Status and Category...at least that's what ALPA merger policy says.
That's what fences are for JSLED. Flew heavies in the AF for 15 years and couldn't care less about flying UAL's ancient WB's for 76 pay. Fence them for 25 years if you like. Won't bother me a bit, especially if they pay what Glen pays to fly them. That's from a pilot's perspective.
From a management perspective, the UAL fleet is probably the most impressive of all US Carriers. UAL brings a pride in the profession that I hold in high regard. I feel that it is a shame what the BK judges and Tilton did to your company and you deserve a lot better.
In all honesty, I look forward to UAL unionism in our airline. I hope you get back all that Tilton gave away to make this merger happen, but hope that you don't seek to get it from CAL pilots.
AS a USAir guy, I hated the Niche award. As a result, I left a 6 year 767 f/o position to start work at CAL for a shameful $29/hr because the thought of being 2,000 numbers jr to a guy hired 6 years after me nauseated me. Relative Sr in UAL/CAL would be bad, but not as bad as I have experienced.
I sincerely hope that UAL and CAL pilots spend the money to buy the best lawyers and put this SLI behind us through arbitration. With your work rules, our scope and 500+ retirements/yr starting in 2013, we should be able to declare victory in under a decade by keeping our UAL at 750 aircraft as opposed to 550 fed by 1,000 70/90 seat rj's. I realize that UAL pilots have given back more than CAL pilots ever had. But we can't try to get it back from each other. Put up big fences to protect your impressive fleet and our impressive advancement, all the whilst providing a good product and we shall be successful.
Coming back fro Mil leave next month. I am so looking forward to having the UAL self-esteem in my Pilot group.
That's what fences are for JSLED. Flew heavies in the AF for 15 years and couldn't care less about flying UAL's ancient WB's for 76 pay. Fence them for 25 years if you like. Won't bother me a bit, especially if they pay what Glen pays to fly them. That's from a pilot's perspective.
From a management perspective, the UAL fleet is probably the most impressive of all US Carriers. UAL brings a pride in the profession that I hold in high regard. I feel that it is a shame what the BK judges and Tilton did to your company and you deserve a lot better.
In all honesty, I look forward to UAL unionism in our airline. I hope you get back all that Tilton gave away to make this merger happen, but hope that you don't seek to get it from CAL pilots.
AS a USAir guy, I hated the Niche award. As a result, I left a 6 year 767 f/o position to start work at CAL for a shameful $29/hr because the thought of being 2,000 numbers jr to a guy hired 6 years after me nauseated me. Relative Sr in UAL/CAL would be bad, but not as bad as I have experienced.
I sincerely hope that UAL and CAL pilots spend the money to buy the best lawyers and put this SLI behind us through arbitration. With your work rules, our scope and 500+ retirements/yr starting in 2013, we should be able to declare victory in under a decade by keeping our UAL at 750 aircraft as opposed to 550 fed by 1,000 70/90 seat rj's. I realize that UAL pilots have given back more than CAL pilots ever had. But we can't try to get it back from each other. Put up big fences to protect your impressive fleet and our impressive advancement, all the whilst providing a good product and we shall be successful.
Coming back fro Mil leave next month. I am so looking forward to having the UAL self-esteem in my Pilot group.
320, this is not about you or me. I would retire around #150 if UAL stayed independent. I fully expect that number to increase by the 100's once the dust settles on this sli. DAL/NWA used 4 categories: w/b captains, n/b captains, w/b first officers, n/b first officers. This methodology used the number of positions in each category brought to the arbitration. Relative seniority within category and status. Yes there were fences around each group's premium a/c, but 5 yr fences...not 25 years. That's silly. I expect our arbitrated sli will closely resemble the NWA/DAL award. But as Mr. Fluf says, it 'don't matta' what I think, whatever happens, happens. We will have to live with it. What we need to focus on is the JCBA!!
Last edited by jsled; 05-05-2010 at 06:14 AM.
05-05-2010, 05:21 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by SUPERfluf
No its not fair and straight relative seniority is not how it will be done. It doesn't matter what the pilot population at each carrier says, it will be done according to ALPA policy and the cases put forth by the merger committees. DAL/NWA didn't go straight relative seniority because of the widebody differences, yet most ended up pretty darn close to their previous relative seniority.
There's no sense in everyone throwing stones on here or anywhere as it won't matter a damn what you think. The majority does not rule in an SLI.
If we get all wound up and ****y with each other over the SLI, which we don't really have any control over and won't be voting on, how are we going to fight together to get a kick ass JCBA?
We have a BIG fight ahead of us. King Smisek has nocturnal emissions over 70 seat jets flown by Colgan and Gulfstream. He's been salivating over that for a while now. It's one of the many lame-ass reasons for the Delta + $1 BS they threw at us. We need to focus on what we can control and let the merger committees do their thing.
There's no sense in everyone throwing stones on here or anywhere as it won't matter a damn what you think. The majority does not rule in an SLI.
If we get all wound up and ****y with each other over the SLI, which we don't really have any control over and won't be voting on, how are we going to fight together to get a kick ass JCBA?
We have a BIG fight ahead of us. King Smisek has nocturnal emissions over 70 seat jets flown by Colgan and Gulfstream. He's been salivating over that for a while now. It's one of the many lame-ass reasons for the Delta + $1 BS they threw at us. We need to focus on what we can control and let the merger committees do their thing.
You are so correct. It's out of the line pilots hands unless we decide to pull a USAir end run. That will not happen.
I personally know one of UAL merger committee members. He is fair, competent, and will work for the United pilots. I trust you have the same quality in your merger committee members who will work on your behalf. We should let that process run it's course and prepare for the true problem at hand.
There are many things the CAL pilots don't want to witness. A bunch of 70 seat RJs parking at gates where your guppys used to park. The roll out of a pretty green A330 flying to Madrid and you are told that the venture is planned to rapidly expand. The hubris of an RJ pilot group who tells you to correct their jumpseat problems or they will ban you from their jumpseats.
Yes Fluf, there are a lot of problem we will have to face. If we are united, we have a good chance.
Fritz
05-05-2010, 05:43 AM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: EMB-145
Posts: 427
Originally Posted by EXTW
Going from a relative 40% on the original list to a relative 91% on the combined list, and going from Captain to furlough in 11 months is not what I would call doing "OK".
EXTW
EXTW
My point is that bashing ALPA National for the tragedy of TWA's bankruptcy, APA's merger policy and 9/11 isn't being true to the facts.
Could ALPA National have done more? Probably. Would it have changed the outcome? Probably not. Either way, the pilot group's own MEC has much more power and responsibility for their fate than National. This goes for both general day-to-day stuff and mergers.
05-05-2010, 05:45 AM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: e190
Posts: 929
Originally Posted by Fritzthepilot
Fluf,
... The hubris of an RJ pilot group who tells you to correct their jumpseat problems or they will ban you from their jumpseats.
Fritz
... The hubris of an RJ pilot group who tells you to correct their jumpseat problems or they will ban you from their jumpseats.
Fritz
You supported CAL and UAL pilots getting priority over regionals while jumpseating on mainline then it is very easy to propose Regionals getting priority on other regionals jumpseats. With regionals making up almost 40% of all domestic lift you are going to have a hard time getting to work especially if you live in a small city. Our jumpseat committee wasnt even notified of this little love fest between your unions until the deal was almost signed. You cant expect to upset the status quo and potentially affect another persons QOL without a fight. Blame your management or whoever you want for the RJ's flying around but the pilots are just trying to get to work.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
