Hello everyone, sorry for my absence but I have been reevaluating in the interim. Update: I know I have been saying 25% increase on pay for a while, but it is now looking like 30%. You can decide for yourself if that is enough. For me, not really. I won't reiterate why, as I have done so many times before on this forum. As for the RJ and outsourcing issue that keeps arising, it still remains a done deal for many of the reasons I have also stated. Most importantly, it is not part of the business plan for UAL/CAL going forward. IATA's own passenger travel demand forecast over the next 10 years simply cannot be met through a 50 and 70 seat RJ. That is why management so readily agreed to restoring scope so long ago. Believe it or not we gave away 10% of our wage increase for something management knew was worthless. Once again, the pressure is on to get this JCBA signed by October with the above stipulations on pay, scope and work rules. This is a contract that will be with us for a long time even if it is for a short duration because we will lose our ability to strike after the merger. We need time to evaluate the true profitability of the new company because it [B]will[B] far exceed all estimates. Why do I know all these things? Can't really say but every other prediction on this forum has come true - last one August 9th - merger was in a little trouble and the stock was headed lower. It is down 17% since then.

BFD. Take a look at DAL stock while your at it...It tanked as well, as did the DOW and S&P since August 9th for that matter...nostradamus. And we won't lose our ability to strike. We might be able to or might not be able to. Predicting that is like me saying it won't rain on Thanksgiving Day this year. AMR had 2 stikes in the 90's when it was as big an airline as the new UAL will be. It depends on who is President and who makes up the NMB at the time. I will vote yes at the October deadline IF it is a good offer. That is the bottom line. We don't need time. But if you are into predictions, here is one for you. I believe the deadline will come and go without a new JCBA. The companies will ride our crappy contracts till the last minute.

JSLED,

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ca...-scope-13.html

Above is the exact quote. I did say the entire market was headed lower at it's 3 month high on August 9th, Nostradamus. Sure, you already knew it was headed lower. There are other issues which are specific to the UAL/CAL merger which are contingent with the movement of the rest of the market - labor issues and jobs (why the market has moved lower), which is why we now have additional scrutiny over this particular merger which the DOJ is using as a precedent for other mergers going forward - not just airline mergers. The current administration does not want continued downward pressure on the labor market and is increasingly seeing corporations sitting on record cash, using it for stock buybacks and M&A, not job growth. That is why this merger, in particular, is in the crosshairs, for UAL's historically negative campaign against labor. (But you knew all this, right? Well before August 9th - lol). This is one of the reasons management has been so agreeable thus far, and as why I have said so many times on this forum that the pilots have unprecedented negotiating power... and why I keep saying that acceptance of this JCBA by an October deadline is not enough time to evaluate, no matter what is offered.

So this is why the DOJ approved the merger? You are clueless. It seems that the voice of John Barton is using your username as a medium. Better check your sign on is secure. How was that FEB?

Clueless? You have no idea. The issues I spoke took of place over the last three weeks, since my post on August 9th. Yes, the DOJ approved the merger. I never said they wouldn't. I just said it was hitting some turbulence. Let me educate you on what transpired over that time period. The DOJ should have approved this merger a few weeks back. However, labor issues kept arising, as well as unfair competition issues. We fought very hard to not give up the 18 slots at Newark, as well as furthering a commitment over labor issues. Normally, the DOJ's review of any merger is strictly limited to antitrust issues, however it is fairly unprecedented that the DOJ had formal and informal meetings with the various labor unions, the most recent one a few days earlier with the head of the IAM. There, however, have been no public meetings with ALPA leadership, because ALPA has already cut a deal to back this merger fully, in exchange for scope restoration, 30% pay increases, work rule restoration and a 10 - 15% equity stake in the new company - all a very good bargain for the company, incidentally. Clueless? You my friend will always be a day late and a dollar short. You can't get the story from the guy sitting next to you in the cockpit.

I get all my stories from apc forums. Far more accurate than the cockpit.

All joking aside, I hope you're correct - but you didn't specify who would receive a "30% pay raise". I'm sure you've noticed the disparity between current UAL and CAL hourly rates.

Just vote NO.

Your management wants the joint contract done yesterday for the same reason Delta management did, to avoid a US Air / America West fiasco. You see if the joint contract is done prior to the SLI then once your SLI comes back from the aribitrator, which I'm positive it will go, then it goes into effect. If you didn't already have a joint contract in place then you have to have it pass a vote which would only happen if the United guys were happy with the SLI results since they have the majority.

Just my opinion.

Ok big guy. Who is "we" ? What position and title do you hold to proclaim WE status. Mr. Barton you are proven liar many times over.

To those reading the post from oncea757cap, it would serve you well to know this pilot has zero credibility. Read his post for amusement only.

Want it or not, it's a moot point now per the policy. ALPA's present policy pretty much dictates that the "horse will come before the cart" as far as the JCBA v SLI. The only thing the company can hope for is the TA is voted into a JCBA by the roadmap/time line that they are hoping for....first week Oct 2010.

First of all, you would be correct.....ALPA has not held any "public" meeting regarding the specific's of our negotiations, no surprise here. Being that you are versed in your Union, I'm sure you realize that ALPA does NOT negotiate in public. This has been their mantra from the start during this merger.

Please clarify...as far as your claims (in this thread, as well as others) regarding specifics pertaining to our future TA (JCBA), can you just clarify for all of us that your claims are that of shear conjecture/personal speculation?? Multiple UAL colleagues have called you out on your 'baseless claims'....Is it fact (leaking privileged info), or just fiction.....Which one is it sir??

Starting to get your drift

Okay, you win. I'm done. This is my last post. But I will leave all my previous posts up for comparison for when the TA is announced. I truly was trying to help by offering some critical insight that your union nor management will provide - a very important frame of reference. Despite all your cynicism and criticism, I wish you and this pilot group the best of luck. You are about to get a good contract, but not nearly what you could have had. Time will tell. I've got more important fish to fry. BTW, SoCal's claim that ALPA does not negotiate in public. What do you call the recent "public" statement from ALPA demanding all scope restored. Is that not negotiating in public. Funny how that coincided with the DOJ approval. You think they'd publicly demand that and the JCBA not have it. How would you expect anyone to vote for it, not to mention how demoralizing a defeat that would appear to be for ALPA. I've said all along that scope restoration is a done deal. But I'm done from here out. Just act really surprised when the TA is out and if you want a really good contract just vote no and you'll get a real contract by the end of the year. Cheers.