Vacancy 19-04
11-09-2018, 09:50 AM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by JoePatroni
You can call it what you want but the starting point was the current contract at the respective carriers. History has nothing to do with it.
11-09-2018, 10:00 AM
#122
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: B737 CA
Posts: 226
Steering back toward the original topic of the vacancy bid...does anyone think the fact that there are 10 unfilled slots to GUM and that new hires will be most likely be placed there will impact those who want to apply/work at United? 
11-09-2018, 10:01 AM
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 281
Originally Posted by Sunvox
I would respectfully disagree and say that what was relevant at the time was United's provisions and Delta's payrates which we achieved plus a little. All contract negotiations are based on the history of older contracts. Delta did not band their 767-400s in the top pay group. I get the fact that Continental did hence their desire to keep it that way, but I think the "sand in the line" tactics were what folks found tough to swallow. Like I said, in the end I'm glad we got the banding the way it is, and I, for one, do not believe it resulted in a lower top tier pay rate. I think it merely increased the total number of top paid pilots, and that was a very good thing.
I’m pretty sick of the same storyline that if it isn’t or wasn’t done like the old United way, then it’s wrong ... I get the arguments both pro and con for all the banding schemes ... but the old banding scheme at pre merger United doesn’t mean that that is the best scheme just because it was done that way at the old United.
11-09-2018, 10:11 AM
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by SEDPA
And where would the 787 be in a legacy united contract? Same as the 767-300? The 787 was already top tier banded in the CAL contract. I’ve talked to the rep who others accuse of holding the contract hostage ... it was NEVER an SLI ploy ... it was about getting the max number of positions into the highest band, end of story.
I’m pretty sick of the same storyline that if it isn’t or wasn’t done like the old United way, then it’s wrong ... I get the arguments both pro and con for all the banding schemes ... but the old banding scheme at pre merger United doesn’t mean that that is the best scheme just because it was done that way at the old United.
I’m pretty sick of the same storyline that if it isn’t or wasn’t done like the old United way, then it’s wrong ... I get the arguments both pro and con for all the banding schemes ... but the old banding scheme at pre merger United doesn’t mean that that is the best scheme just because it was done that way at the old United.
Umm, if you read my last line I said I agree; in the end it was a good thing. I'm saying that it wasn't JUST about the two existing contracts that's not how new contracts are negotiated. New contracts are based on the sum of the other unions latest and greatest not just one company's contract whether it was United's or Continental's. Also the "storyline" is not and never was that it had to be the United way or the highway, it actually came down the other direction with JP physically walking out of the room with the other reps saying it was the Continental way or the highway. Fortunately in the end calmer heads prevailed, and our contract today represents some of the best elements of Delta's pay, United's work rules, and Continental's pay bands and monthly hour limits.
11-09-2018, 10:55 AM
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 767/757 CA
Posts: 2,606
Originally Posted by Macdacpilot
Steering back toward the original topic of the vacancy bid...does anyone think the fact that there are 10 unfilled slots to GUM and that new hires will be most likely be placed there will impact those who want to apply/work at United?
11-09-2018, 11:16 AM
#126
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 281
Originally Posted by Sunvox
Umm, if you read my last line I said I agree; in the end it was a good thing. I'm saying that it wasn't JUST about the two existing contracts that's not how new contracts are negotiated. New contracts are based on the sum of the other unions latest and greatest not just one company's contract whether it was United's or Continental's. Also the "storyline" is not and never was that it had to be the United way or the highway, it actually came down the other direction with JP physically walking out of the room with the other reps saying it was the Continental way or the highway. Fortunately in the end calmer heads prevailed, and our contract today represents some of the best elements of Delta's pay, United's work rules, and Continental's pay bands and monthly hour limits.
11-09-2018, 11:28 AM
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 459
Originally Posted by Macdacpilot
Steering back toward the original topic of the vacancy bid...does anyone think the fact that there are 10 unfilled slots to GUM and that new hires will be most likely be placed there will impact those who want to apply/work at United?
Good point. You should get 9 of your buddies and you to bid it o the new hires don’t have to go..
11-09-2018, 11:56 AM
#128
Guppy reserve EWR
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 501
Mods what does it take?
Honestly, will we be happy when the only two left on this forum are the old muppets in the balcony arguing about the merger.
This is ridiculous.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Honestly, will we be happy when the only two left on this forum are the old muppets in the balcony arguing about the merger.
This is ridiculous.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
