Search
Notices

Longevity

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-19-2010, 05:49 AM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: 747 Captain, retired
Posts: 928
Default

Originally Posted by Monkeyfly View Post
Fine if you don't want to negotiate in public; but can we get some input from some one not p1ssed-off from birth?!?


You must have me in mind. We here at UAL, at least the ones I've spoke with, feel that since we MUST merge with a carrier, CAL is hands down, the best dance partner. We are being assessed now for the merger to protect our interest (I think CAL is doing the same). Our interest (UAL) is to dump Tilton and his team of overcompensated managers and to a lesser extent, protect our career expectations. Career expectations mean different things to different people. My sense is that no matter how much Merger legal talent we hire to protect our (UAL and CAL) respective interest, it will land in arbitration where a neutral party, with no axe to grind, will decide how it will be done. In other words, we are all going to have to take a bite of a s#!t sandwich
krudawg is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 06:50 AM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Le Bus
Posts: 382
Default

Originally Posted by Captain Bligh View Post
If I'm doing the math right, I'd think 5 years on furlough would take the fight out of most people. Geeze...it ain't that good of a job.
Well that explains the willingness of senior dirtbags to sacrifice our careers in exchange for a few bucks...don't you just love these kind of people?

It "ain't that good of a job" because *%$@%$!* like you keep selling the JR guys down the river to protect your "good jobs".

Last edited by SOTeric; 08-19-2010 at 07:02 AM.
SOTeric is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 08:45 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 332
Default

I read and understand the argument about the 13 year UAL pilot who had the opportunity to spend a year or two in the left seat and has had 13 years of longevity upset about being put in relative seniority against someone hired at CAL in 2005(me). I understand the argument about the career progression at the end if the UAL 1997 career and the widebody captain spots. If I was that person I'd mention the same things in an argument. My counter would be that us 2005 hires at CAL were holding 737 captain and in my case it would be about 30 years in the left seat vs whatever will play out with this merger. That is a big career earnings difference. While we lack in the widebody count currently, we have new widebody aircraft on order with delivery slots. That is growth and growth in the widebody fleet. You will benefit from all the 787's that will be arriving(at least 50 and probably closer to 100 over the next decade) even if they end up replacing some of the 767-300 like most think will happen down the road.
If we both stood alone, I can honestly say that my career progression would be a lot greater at CAL than it will be with the merger. I do feel as if the combined carrier will be more solid financially going forward than either would be alone. I'm willing to give up a little seniority to work for a true powerhouse on a worldwide scale with more job security(even if that job is in the right seat a decade longer than "expected"). I hope in the end we all accept the outcome of the SLI and move forward rather than do what US Airways has done. Hopefully the new contract will overcome what some may deem as a loss in the SLI.
IAHB756 is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 08:53 AM
  #34  
Ben Salley
 
A320fumes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Left
Posts: 924
Default

Originally Posted by robthree View Post
No dog in this fight, but just a point of fact, according to APC:


UAL has 78 aircraft paying max rate of 190/130,
CAL has 48 aircraft paying max rate of 193/132.

UAL has 132 aircraft paying max rate of 159/109
CAL has 221 aircraft paying max rate of 169/116

UAL has 152 aircraft paying max rate of 137/94
CAL has 76 aircraft paying max rate of 150/102

(CAL 737 Fleet average (2/3 LN, 1/3SN) 162/111)

of those
UAL has 35 767s in the middle pay band
CAL has 26 767s paying the top rate,

Short call reserve at CAL puts their 737-500 drivers ahead of UAL's 767 drivers in terms of guarantee.

UAL has 40% more aircraft @ the WB rate,
and 100% more aircraft at the SN rate.
Whereas CAL has 60% more 'middle class' aircraft.

UAL has a larger 'upper class', and a much larger 'lower class'.
But CAL's 'lower class' make almost the same as UAL's middle class.
(only about $3-400/month less on guarantee)

Given that CAL's pilots are cross utilized on small and large 737s, it certainly appears that almost all CAL drivers make as much as or more than UALs 767 drivers.
Or in other words, all CAL pilots have a better pay rate than 79% of UAL pilots.

That's what I said!

No ill will towards anyone personally, but my @ss still aches from the Nicolau Award. And I trust lawyers only a little more than I trust the Sr @ CAL. God help us all.
A320fumes is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 09:42 AM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Captain Bligh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Default

Originally Posted by SOTeric View Post
Well that explains the willingness of senior dirtbags to sacrifice our careers in exchange for a few bucks...don't you just love these kind of people?

It "ain't that good of a job" because *%$@%$!* like you keep selling the JR guys down the river to protect your "good jobs".
I'll be the first to admit I am a *%$@%$!*, especially when it comes to #$^&*. Not entirely sure how I've personally "sold any RJ guys down the river". As a life time MIGS, I've never voted for any scope waive, my line has the best that is still enforceable in the industry and I've only voted to ratify one contract in my life time and that was a long time before the first RJ rolled out of the jungle. That one was via an in house union, when you were more than likely not yet learning how to fly. I am always amused at the perception that somehow the realities of the business cycle (and the fact that the airlines just don't need as many pilots and certainly fewer with attitudes) is the fault of the pilots who have jobs in the eyes of those who don't.

Just saying, if it weren't for timing, I'd have done something else. With an attitude like your's, my advice is you should too. You might not be so paranoid if it weren't for the fact that everyone's out to get you.
Captain Bligh is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 11:24 AM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: 747 Captain, retired
Posts: 928
Default

Originally Posted by krudawg View Post
[/color]

You must have me in mind. We here at UAL, at least the ones I've spoke with, feel that since we MUST merge with a carrier, CAL is hands down, the best dance partner. We are being assessed now for the merger to protect our interest (I think CAL is doing the same). Our interest (UAL) is to dump Tilton and his team of overcompensated managers and to a lesser extent, protect our career expectations. Career expectations mean different things to different people. My sense is that no matter how much Merger legal talent we hire to protect our (UAL and CAL) respective interest, it will land in arbitration where a neutral party, with no axe to grind, will decide how it will be done. In other words, we are all going to have to take a bite of a s#!t sandwich
Sorry, the highlighted is meant to imply that the decision to merge was made by our CEO NOT the employee's. My brain did not send the correct message to my hands that were typing.
krudawg is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 12:57 PM
  #37  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Le Bus
Posts: 382
Default

Originally Posted by Captain Bligh View Post
I'll be the first to admit I am a *%$@%$!*, especially when it comes to #$^&*. Not entirely sure how I've personally "sold any RJ guys down the river". As a life time MIGS, I've never voted for any scope waive, my line has the best that is still enforceable in the industry and I've only voted to ratify one contract in my life time and that was a long time before the first RJ rolled out of the jungle. That one was via an in house union, when you were more than likely not yet learning how to fly. I am always amused at the perception that somehow the realities of the business cycle (and the fact that the airlines just don't need as many pilots and certainly fewer with attitudes) is the fault of the pilots who have jobs in the eyes of those who don't.

Just saying, if it weren't for timing, I'd have done something else. With an attitude like your's, my advice is you should too. You might not be so paranoid if it weren't for the fact that everyone's out to get you.
Just sayin, I wouldn't be so paranoid if fellow UAL pilots hadn't sold us furloughed guys down the river. See, I've never flown an RJ. And yes, the jobs not that great....hell, you saw to that.
SOTeric is offline  
Old 08-19-2010, 09:36 PM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
robthree's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777, sofa
Posts: 1,183
Default

Originally Posted by A320fumes View Post
Longevity(10 years) * Status(furlough)=SLI position

10*0=0

That's my vote.
Hmm, I was just wondering...


It has always seemed unfair that a Brand-X pilot, with ten years longevity at his carrier is stapled below a pilot at Brand-Y, simply because Brand-X's management has furloughed the first guy.

It has also seemed unfair that a Brand-Y guy who has a job, could lose it, due to the ebb and flow of recalls and furloughs after a merger.


What if there were two lists? One for bid seniority - essentially ordered by longevity - and another list to be used in case of recall or furlough - ordered by relative position, with furloughees stapled? The competing interests of each pilot are protected - when Pilot X is recalled he enjoys seniority over Pilot Y, but should furloughs return, Pilot Ys job is protected.

Thoughts?
robthree is offline  
Old 08-20-2010, 05:03 AM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Captain Bligh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Default

Originally Posted by SOTeric View Post
Just sayin, I wouldn't be so paranoid if fellow UAL pilots hadn't sold us furloughed guys down the river. See, I've never flown an RJ. And yes, the jobs not that great....hell, you saw to that.
So... rather than an illustration of how I personally have sold RJ guys down the river, you'll just continue to insist that your poor work ethic, your attitude, your inability to see that you choose an over sold career, your lot in life, is STILL somehow my fault.

I'd say if we ever get the chance to fly together, you'll really dislike the job, especially in the weeks and months that follow as you are trying to defend my well documented accusations of your perpetual safety compromising insubordinations.
Captain Bligh is offline  
Old 08-20-2010, 05:18 AM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
EWRflyr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,882
Default

Originally Posted by krudawg View Post
We are being assessed now for the merger to protect our interest (I think CAL is doing the same).
As of right now, no, CAL pilots aren't being assessed for this merger. This is due to the fact that we had a merger fund of a set amount when all this began. It was mentioned on the latest Town Hall Conference Call that the CAL MEC is discussing putting an assessment vote out to the pilots for sometime this fall in the event that the balance of the fund goes below a certain amount.

Not sure what this fund would be used for at this time and why the balance would be going down since UniCal management has agreed to pay all merger related expenses to UniCal ALPA for the time being.
EWRflyr is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sailor
Spirit
14117
10-09-2015 07:55 AM
Intl Jumper
Regional
34
02-20-2010 10:07 AM
Joe Walsh
Regional
2
06-22-2009 05:54 PM
laserman2431
Regional
12
11-07-2008 05:40 AM
EWRflyr
Major
44
09-17-2008 09:23 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices