Longevity
08-20-2010, 05:28 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Originally Posted by EWRflyr
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.
08-20-2010, 02:49 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by robthree
Hmm, I was just wondering...
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.
Thoughts?
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.
Thoughts?
I'd have to say the difference between longevity and career expectations is that longevity is pretty easy to define whereas career expectations???? Promises promises........
08-20-2010, 04:48 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
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.
lol, I missed the TIC emoticon.
08-20-2010, 04:53 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by kc135driver
...I'd have to say the difference between longevity and career expectations is that longevity is pretty easy to define whereas career expectations???? Promises promises........
Category and Status is pretty easy to define as well.
The integration will not be limited to those three or nor will any one method apply.
08-21-2010, 05:10 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,882
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
Didn't the trip loss scandal accusers say that all of those monies had been depleted by the trip loss abuses?
That might be what THEY say, but only some of what they say has any basis in fact.
Just telling you what I heard on the MEC Town Hall Conference call from a couple of weeks ago. I don't remember how it came up (i.e. if someone asked about UAL MEC assessing their pilots, etc.), but Jay said we haven't gone down that road yet because we started this process with a certain level in our merger fund. He indicated the UA pilots didn't have that so an assessment was in effect there. Might be coming to us sometime this fall should our merger fund drop below a certain limit.
08-21-2010, 11:45 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Yeah, I know how crazy THEY can sound. As a person that paid into the fund however, then watched it become nearly depleted, then patiently waited for the "Fagone Report" to come out, I've never seen any accounting on where we are with regard to recovery of funds.
I've just assumed that since the debt forgiveness provisions associated with the pay back scheme involved "work back credit", rather than hard after tax dollars, that we just pressed on with a short balance.
I'd like to see some accounting, just in case there are still some bad guys out there, but that's a topic for another thread.
I've just assumed that since the debt forgiveness provisions associated with the pay back scheme involved "work back credit", rather than hard after tax dollars, that we just pressed on with a short balance.
I'd like to see some accounting, just in case there are still some bad guys out there, but that's a topic for another thread.
08-22-2010, 04:35 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,882
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
Yeah, I know how crazy THEY can sound. As a person that paid into the fund however, then watched it become nearly depleted, then patiently waited for the "Fagone Report" to come out, I've never seen any accounting on where we are with regard to recovery of funds.
I've just assumed that since the debt forgiveness provisions associated with the pay back scheme involved "work back credit", rather than hard after tax dollars, that we just pressed on with a short balance.
I'd like to see some accounting, just in case there are still some bad guys out there, but that's a topic for another thread.
I've just assumed that since the debt forgiveness provisions associated with the pay back scheme involved "work back credit", rather than hard after tax dollars, that we just pressed on with a short balance.
I'd like to see some accounting, just in case there are still some bad guys out there, but that's a topic for another thread.
However, that matter is not what I was talking about. At the start of this point in our history (i.e. the merger announcement) CALALPA had a sufficient merger fund balance so we have not begun an assessment yet.
08-22-2010, 05:49 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by robthree
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.
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.
08-22-2010, 06:32 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by sydney5316
Well now I'm impressed.
All we can do is wait and see. Time will tell if I am right.
Last edited by jsled; 08-23-2010 at 04:20 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
