ALPA Seniority Merger Policy
05-03-2010, 05:26 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 400
ALPA Seniority Merger Policy
Greetings all...
Forgive my petty ignornace here, I've been busy looking for work on furlough!
However, is anybody versed on how the ALPA seniority merger policy works?
Cheers to my brothers and sisters...dare we say that for once its not all doom and gloom in our industry.
dv
Forgive my petty ignornace here, I've been busy looking for work on furlough!
However, is anybody versed on how the ALPA seniority merger policy works?
Cheers to my brothers and sisters...dare we say that for once its not all doom and gloom in our industry.
dv
05-03-2010, 05:33 AM
#2
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Here you go:
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/mag...ergers_p14.pdf
Until recently, it was pretty easy to guess how a merger was going to shake out, by pre merger equipment and pay. In other words, if you were a 767 First Officer at 50% before the merger, you were probably going to be a 767 First Officer at 50% after the merger. If you made $110K the year before the merger, the goal was to have you making $110K, or a little more after the merger. In other words, same after as you had before.
HOWEVER, recent arbitration awards have not honored status quo. These recent decisions will make the UAL / CAL more difficult because:
Near the bottoms of these FUTURE EXPECTATION lists, the results can get ugly. In my case I'm senior to guys hired 6 years before me, but at the same time I was a 767 First Officer barely holding a line in Atlanta and was now side by side with furlough bypass & reserve pilots on the DC9 in Detroit. While I would have taken a 40% pay cut from present position, those hired before me have plenty to be upset about with my seniority result also. I figure it will take eight years to get back to even. On the other pre-merger side, they may feel they'll never get back to even, despite the fact they can now hold equipment and bases which were no where near their seniority prior to the merger.
The primary advantage of a Cross Bidding System is that it reduces the immediate effect of a arbitrated seniority list. It allows pilots to remain int heir pre-merger status quo until they chose to bid over to the combined categories. While the arbitrated list might not be completely fair, giving the pilot the choice as to when to come over provides much greater security than getting bumped aircraft to aircraft as the displacement and advancement bids come down over them.
At one time I had a much better presentation and model, but the kid is screaming ....
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/mag...ergers_p14.pdf
Until recently, it was pretty easy to guess how a merger was going to shake out, by pre merger equipment and pay. In other words, if you were a 767 First Officer at 50% before the merger, you were probably going to be a 767 First Officer at 50% after the merger. If you made $110K the year before the merger, the goal was to have you making $110K, or a little more after the merger. In other words, same after as you had before.
HOWEVER, recent arbitration awards have not honored status quo. These recent decisions will make the UAL / CAL more difficult because:
- Status Quo now may be assumed on some future expectation
- MEC's are now encouraged to bring future (unknowable) allegations to the table more than ever before
- Pilots will hear these presentations and develop their own unrealistic career expectations
- Mergers now have much greater risk because the outcome is even more uncertain due to the introduction of these new variables which may or may not have any objective basis in fact
- As a result of the US Air fiasco, ALPA is literally scared of its demise and there will be heavy pressure to maintain the peace. Knowing this pressure exists, some will game the system, effectively exploiting fear.
- A pilot at the new carrier would be given two seniority numbers. Their current number for bidding their pre-merger airline's pre-merger equipment and one for bidding system equipment (and growth) post merger.
- New hire pilots would simply receive one seniority number, the new airline's number. As the combined carrier grew the number of "former" pilots would disappear as pilot chose to bid into the combined categories and as they retired.
- Advancement due to attrition would still accrue to pilots in pre-merger order on pre-merger equipment. Seats, pay and pre-merger advancement would be protected.
- Furloughs would also be based on pre-merger results.
Near the bottoms of these FUTURE EXPECTATION lists, the results can get ugly. In my case I'm senior to guys hired 6 years before me, but at the same time I was a 767 First Officer barely holding a line in Atlanta and was now side by side with furlough bypass & reserve pilots on the DC9 in Detroit. While I would have taken a 40% pay cut from present position, those hired before me have plenty to be upset about with my seniority result also. I figure it will take eight years to get back to even. On the other pre-merger side, they may feel they'll never get back to even, despite the fact they can now hold equipment and bases which were no where near their seniority prior to the merger.
The primary advantage of a Cross Bidding System is that it reduces the immediate effect of a arbitrated seniority list. It allows pilots to remain int heir pre-merger status quo until they chose to bid over to the combined categories. While the arbitrated list might not be completely fair, giving the pilot the choice as to when to come over provides much greater security than getting bumped aircraft to aircraft as the displacement and advancement bids come down over them.
At one time I had a much better presentation and model, but the kid is screaming ....
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-03-2010 at 06:29 AM.
05-03-2010, 09:40 AM
#5
Not retiring avatar
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Position: 777 CAP
Posts: 768
Hmmm
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Here you go:
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/mag...ergers_p14.pdf
Until recently, it was pretty easy to guess how a merger was going to shake out, by pre merger equipment and pay. In other words, if you were a 767 First Officer at 50% before the merger, you were probably going to be a 767 First Officer at 50% after the merger. If you made $110K the year before the merger, the goal was to have you making $110K, or a little more after the merger. In other words, same after as you had before.
HOWEVER, recent arbitration awards have not honored status quo. These recent decisions will make the UAL / CAL more difficult because:
Near the bottoms of these FUTURE EXPECTATION lists, the results can get ugly. In my case I'm senior to guys hired 6 years before me, but at the same time I was a 767 First Officer barely holding a line in Atlanta and was now side by side with furlough bypass & reserve pilots on the DC9 in Detroit. While I would have taken a 40% pay cut from present position, those hired before me have plenty to be upset about with my seniority result also. I figure it will take eight years to get back to even. On the other pre-merger side, they may feel they'll never get back to even, despite the fact they can now hold equipment and bases which were no where near their seniority prior to the merger.
The primary advantage of a Cross Bidding System is that it reduces the immediate effect of a arbitrated seniority list. It allows pilots to remain int heir pre-merger status quo until they chose to bid over to the combined categories. While the arbitrated list might not be completely fair, giving the pilot the choice as to when to come over provides much greater security than getting bumped aircraft to aircraft as the displacement and advancement bids come down over them.
At one time I had a much better presentation and model, but the kid is screaming ....
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/mag...ergers_p14.pdf
Until recently, it was pretty easy to guess how a merger was going to shake out, by pre merger equipment and pay. In other words, if you were a 767 First Officer at 50% before the merger, you were probably going to be a 767 First Officer at 50% after the merger. If you made $110K the year before the merger, the goal was to have you making $110K, or a little more after the merger. In other words, same after as you had before.
HOWEVER, recent arbitration awards have not honored status quo. These recent decisions will make the UAL / CAL more difficult because:
- Status Quo now may be assumed on some future expectation
- MEC's are now encouraged to bring future (unknowable) allegations to the table more than ever before
- Pilots will hear these presentations and develop their own unrealistic career expectations
- Mergers now have much greater risk because the outcome is even more uncertain due to the introduction of these new variables which may or may not have any objective basis in fact
- As a result of the US Air fiasco, ALPA is literally scared of its demise and there will be heavy pressure to maintain the peace. Knowing this pressure exists, some will game the system, effectively exploiting fear.
- A pilot at the new carrier would be given two seniority numbers. Their current number for bidding their pre-merger airline's pre-merger equipment and one for bidding system equipment (and growth) post merger.
- New hire pilots would simply receive one seniority number, the new airline's number. As the combined carrier grew the number of "former" pilots would disappear as pilot chose to bid into the combined categories and as they retired.
- Advancement due to attrition would still accrue to pilots in pre-merger order on pre-merger equipment. Seats, pay and pre-merger advancement would be protected.
- Furloughs would also be based on pre-merger results.
Near the bottoms of these FUTURE EXPECTATION lists, the results can get ugly. In my case I'm senior to guys hired 6 years before me, but at the same time I was a 767 First Officer barely holding a line in Atlanta and was now side by side with furlough bypass & reserve pilots on the DC9 in Detroit. While I would have taken a 40% pay cut from present position, those hired before me have plenty to be upset about with my seniority result also. I figure it will take eight years to get back to even. On the other pre-merger side, they may feel they'll never get back to even, despite the fact they can now hold equipment and bases which were no where near their seniority prior to the merger.
The primary advantage of a Cross Bidding System is that it reduces the immediate effect of a arbitrated seniority list. It allows pilots to remain int heir pre-merger status quo until they chose to bid over to the combined categories. While the arbitrated list might not be completely fair, giving the pilot the choice as to when to come over provides much greater security than getting bumped aircraft to aircraft as the displacement and advancement bids come down over them.
At one time I had a much better presentation and model, but the kid is screaming ....
05-04-2010, 07:48 AM
#6
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Position: MD80 Capt retired
Posts: 13
I think the United guys need to acknowledge that Continental which was a fraction of United's size in the 60s has grown primarily through acquisitions to IMHO equal United in stature and surpass it in financial soundness. Continental has always had serious airline industry CEOs. United has not had this type of leadership since Stephen Wolf.
Continental is basically made up of Trans Texas/Texas International, Continental, Frontier, People Express and New York Air. All these airlines would have been liquidated along with the careers of people that had in some cases 30 years plus seniority. In the case of Frontier a United acquisition fell apart over pilot seniority integration. Continental stepped in and after a year of operating with separate seniority I think they were integrated using DOH. I don't know much about the seniority integration with People Express. I do know that at our airline, TWA, ALPA told us that the primary reason that the Continental pilots wanted back in ALPA was so they would be treated fairly in a merger.
In the last 10 years I have lost 30 K on defaulted municipal bonds backed by United. In that same period I have had about double that investment in Continental backed airport improvement bonds. The Continental backed municipals have been the best performers in my bond portfolio.
In the 60s and 70s when I was in LAX, I had plenty of friends that were pilots, F/A's and some mechanics at both airlines. Today I live two doors down from a friend and neighbor who is a US air pilot that worked with Randy Babbitt at ALPA national and is presently back flying the line. We also have an American active, Delta ret, Northwest ret, and had a United F/O who had to sell his house in the downturn. We used to enjoy getting together and talking about the airline industry, but we have given up because no one has a clue how to satisfy all the various factions.
I have tried to make this post factually accurate but bear in mind that it comes from my memory. I welcome any corrections from people that have better information than me.
In the second half of my career with TWA which ran from 1-27-67 to 12-1-01 I would gladly have taken my seniority to either of these two airlines, but even though it took me 22 years to get a captain's bid I thoroughly enjoyed every year of my career.
Best of luck to all of you.
Continental is basically made up of Trans Texas/Texas International, Continental, Frontier, People Express and New York Air. All these airlines would have been liquidated along with the careers of people that had in some cases 30 years plus seniority. In the case of Frontier a United acquisition fell apart over pilot seniority integration. Continental stepped in and after a year of operating with separate seniority I think they were integrated using DOH. I don't know much about the seniority integration with People Express. I do know that at our airline, TWA, ALPA told us that the primary reason that the Continental pilots wanted back in ALPA was so they would be treated fairly in a merger.
In the last 10 years I have lost 30 K on defaulted municipal bonds backed by United. In that same period I have had about double that investment in Continental backed airport improvement bonds. The Continental backed municipals have been the best performers in my bond portfolio.
In the 60s and 70s when I was in LAX, I had plenty of friends that were pilots, F/A's and some mechanics at both airlines. Today I live two doors down from a friend and neighbor who is a US air pilot that worked with Randy Babbitt at ALPA national and is presently back flying the line. We also have an American active, Delta ret, Northwest ret, and had a United F/O who had to sell his house in the downturn. We used to enjoy getting together and talking about the airline industry, but we have given up because no one has a clue how to satisfy all the various factions.
I have tried to make this post factually accurate but bear in mind that it comes from my memory. I welcome any corrections from people that have better information than me.
In the second half of my career with TWA which ran from 1-27-67 to 12-1-01 I would gladly have taken my seniority to either of these two airlines, but even though it took me 22 years to get a captain's bid I thoroughly enjoyed every year of my career.
Best of luck to all of you.
05-05-2010, 07:28 AM
#7
No one's home
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by MD80TW
I think the United guys need to acknowledge that Continental which was a fraction of United's size in the 60s has grown primarily through acquisitions to IMHO equal United in stature and surpass it in financial soundness. Continental has always had serious airline industry CEOs. United has not had this type of leadership since Stephen Wolf.
Continental had Six and was a respected fellow before it went through Lorenzo. Bethune brought it back to life.
Wolf was not much better than Lorenzo, only slicker and wearing red suspenders. And he is about the only one who profited from his 'leadership'.
05-13-2010, 04:13 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
I think the United guys need to acknowledge that Continental which was a fraction of United's size in the 60s has grown primarily through acquisitions to IMHO equal United in stature and surpass it in financial soundness.
Continental has always had serious airline industry CEOs. United has not had this type of leadership since Stephen Wolf.
While UAL has not been rainbows and unicorns for a few years. We have regained significant footing and appear to be a formidable stand alone carrier. Hopefully the CO merger will allow for an even better carrier with a bright future. All of the above is an unknown. What is known is that none of what we write here about who is bigger, better etc, will have any impact on what takes place when the union and the arbitrator. So sit back relax and enjoy the ride. We will know the end of this story when it unfolds.
L
05-13-2010, 05:22 PM
#9
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by Lambourne
I think you need realize you are out of touch. What snap shot are you using to determine financial soundness. If you look at the current cash on hand and recent financial reports UA is surpassing CO. If you want to take a knife and slice the best of CO you versus the worst of UA to make your point, then it makes you look like someone with an axe to grind.
Really the only CEO CO has had since Bob Six is Bethune. Other than that it appears that the CO CEO's have been involved in a revolving door also. Who was the genius at CO that decided on CAL Lite?
While UAL has not been rainbows and unicorns for a few years. We have regained significant footing and appear to be a formidable stand alone carrier. Hopefully the CO merger will allow for an even better carrier with a bright future. All of the above is an unknown. What is known is that none of what we write here about who is bigger, better etc, will have any impact on what takes place when the union and the arbitrator. So sit back relax and enjoy the ride. We will know the end of this story when it unfolds.
L
Really the only CEO CO has had since Bob Six is Bethune. Other than that it appears that the CO CEO's have been involved in a revolving door also. Who was the genius at CO that decided on CAL Lite?
While UAL has not been rainbows and unicorns for a few years. We have regained significant footing and appear to be a formidable stand alone carrier. Hopefully the CO merger will allow for an even better carrier with a bright future. All of the above is an unknown. What is known is that none of what we write here about who is bigger, better etc, will have any impact on what takes place when the union and the arbitrator. So sit back relax and enjoy the ride. We will know the end of this story when it unfolds.
L
Don't you think it is awfully coincidental that UAL made money for the first time in ages when a merger came up???
05-13-2010, 06:23 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 645
United has taken much more aggressive steps to shore up their financial situation than virtually any other of the legacy carriers. They have parked 100 aircraft, sold assets and renegotiated others. At the expense of the 1437 furloughees and thousands of other terminated employees, the company is in stronger financial condition and better prepared to weather a protracted downturn. The condition a company was in 9 years ago has no bearing on its financial health today. United is in better financial shape than Continental.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
