You're absolutely correct about RS not being mentioned but the 1000lb gorilla in the room would be the DAL/NWA precedent set with the merger of two supposed equals.

As I stated, DOH would be way better for me but I think the fairer relative seniority scenario will play a major part in our upcoming merger.

 

As stated above, I see a surgical scalpel dissecting our list with certain formulas applying to different areas of the list.

 

Not to microanalyze your reply but the exact same thing will occur over here as well. We've got a boatload of retirements coming up over the next few years. The bottom line is we ARE merging and career movement on the stand-alone lists are all but a look in the rear-view mirror.

 

DAL/NWA was done by a "Category and Status Ratio". Those are the exact words used by the arbitrator in the award. In other words, the combined group was broken into 4 categories...wb cap, wb f/o, nb cap, and nb f/o. The pilots were ratioed within those categories based on the number of pilots existing in each category/status before the merger. Quite different than just taking into account relative seniority within a straight seniority list. Interesting that the Alpa merger policy now has "category and status" as one of the criteria, as well as longevity. And both were added after UsAir and DAL.

 

The best input I have heard from this group regarding SLI is when someone states the actual scenario for a segment of the list; as 757AV8R and 757Driver have. This is a demonstration of how straight line realtive seniority won't work.

I don't expect to gain anything at a CAL pilot expense but I don't expect (hope) to lose anything either.

In the exapmple of a UAL 1997 hire RelSen fails on all 3 counts in the ALPA merger policy.

Longevity: 13 years continuously at UAL (with several as captain) vs. a 2006 hire at CAL

Career expectations: Retiring at top 200 vs. top 1700 plus all the years in between are a big difference. Plus, UAL is bringing more retirements in the same period of time, or as the DAL/NWA arbitrator put it, more guaranteed advancements.

Status and Catagory: As a previous poster said, DAL/NWA broke down the list by widebody vs narrowbody and then did ratios from there. The same has to apply to us. For example: In straight-line seniority, (top x number of jobs are wide body Capts.; next y number of jobs are narrowbody Capts. , then widebody F/O, then narrowbody FO.) a UAL pilot that was at, say, 75% on the widebody F/O list would end up lower down that list after a straight RelSen integration due to the difference in number of widebodies. Conversely a CAL pilot would wind up relatively higher for the same reason.

This argument might not work in other areas of the list, but I'd like to hear from others at different sections of their seniority lists.

 

You are assuming that the 1500 CAL guys want to fly a heavy. Heck I'll be happy to retire in the 737. That's my Career Expectation.

 

By default, DAL/NWA was done on relative seniority. The comparable WB/NB ratios might lead one to believe that Category/Status ratio is referenced in their SLI. The disparagy between CAL/UAL WB/NB fleet ratios, don't allow fair juxtaposition of status and relative Sr.

Consider 2 factors. 1, Not all pilots consider super-long haul on the 777 desirable. Personally, I've spent way too many days with 17 hours at FL430. I could fly the 75/76 until I retire. I never want to spend more than 7.5 hours above fl280 again if possible. 2, CAL NB's pay more than UAL WB's, in most cases, anyway. The whole equipment argument is based on the premise that larger a/c pay better rates; not the case in this merger. My family would prefer I fly a SWA guppy or Jetblue A-320 above 80hrs than a UAL whale.

Lastly, I went through the UAL/AAA merger in 2000. It failed against popular coronation. I hope this merger fails as well, because there is nothing in it for the majority of my pilot group. I think that UAL could be a great stand-alone company with the best pilot group. But your management has neither the ability or desire to be the great airline that UAL should be. Fckng Shame. Bless us all.

 

Per the ALPA merger policy, no pilot will be voting on the SLI, not even the MEC's.

Don't worry, you can always sue and decertify ALPA if you are not happy.

 

I don't even get involved in Seniority integration talks with any pilot for the simple fact that:

1. I have no say at the table

2. I have no VOTE on the outcome

3. An arbitrator will be making the final decision.

I'm serious when I say I do not spend time thinking about the SLI process and where I will fall on the list. There is not one thing I can do about it, and an arbitrator can decided to do whatever he/she wants. So, to me, even discussions about this topic are a waste of time as no two people will ever agree on how it should be and what should be taken into account.

Personally, I would love to see seniority go by tall guys, born in NY on a Thursday afternoon, right around happy hour, who like pizza after a round on the course trying to maintain their 15 handicap....but that is just me.

 

1) I am not led to believe anything. I just read it verbatim from the DAL/NWA SLI award.....page 28..

"Summarizing, based on the record in its entirety, we conclude a four-category list, constructed on a Status and Category/Ratio basis, will properly respond to the demands of fairness and equity in the context of these particular facts."



2) If you think "Not all pilots consider super-long haul on the 777 desirable" will affect the sli, you are mistaken. That is comical.



3) <<CAL NB's pay more than UAL WB's, in most cases, anyway. The whole equipment argument is based on the premise that larger a/c pay better rates; not the case in this merger.>>

Where do you come up with this stuff? the Facts are: UAL's w/b rates are $190/132 per hr. That is $-3/-2 or a whopping 1.5% less than CALs w/b rates. The difference is UAL has WAAAY more w/b's than CAL, thus more guys earning those rates. CAL's n/b rates are nowhere near $190/132.