787= widebody.

 

The simple solution is to band the B-787 with the B-747. The 787 has significantly longer range and generates significantly more revenue per ASM. Surely, the UAL NC won't have a problem with this. Right........?

 

In theory it might be a good idea...if the 400 were debanded and the payrate increased relative to the 777. What do you think about the idea?

 

Sounds fair to me. This way we won't have to expend negotiating capital and SLI time because we are concerned that our scabs are fenced off from ever flying the 747 and "advancing" their careers. They got all the advancement they need by crossing the picket line and staying to age 65.

PS: I apologize for the slight (very slight) thread drift in my remarks.

 

400 and the 78. Fence both until no UAL scab can ever fly a 78 and no CAL scab will ever fly a 400

 

Ahhhhhh..... The SCAB fence

The only problem is that scum and slime can ooze through almost anything! I share your disdain for them!

 

Do you have any idea what the "J" in JCBA means? Maybe you could expound on what "we" blew at UA.

 

Of course that completely flies in the face of 70 years of pay to weight standards. The 787 might have a higher ASM revenue number, but, please, the 747 generates twice the total revenue.

 

Simple.....

Let the "old" UAL pilots have their fence to protect their seats, and future seats on the B747 (for the bases it serves.....guys who just want the 'stigma' of flying it....whatever the reason). This should satifiy "some" of the "old" UAL pilots who want to keep (or see in future bids) their names on the B747 staffing.

On the Flip-Side.....keep the WB common band/pay for the B777 (B878) & B747 (at a much more 'appropriate' amount than either of the existing CBA's). This would keep the senior CAL Pilots from being locked out of the 'top' pay scale. It still gives the "old" UAL pilots their rights to the B747 that "some" senior CAL pilots would otherwise hold w/o fences.

We ALL know that the next step after the JCBA is going to go to Arbitration (you know?? The thing that starts with a "S"??). You are correct in this being "Joint".....but sure as heck, one side is NOT going to give themselves up for something that could be very pivotal in arbitration considerations in the very near future.....and Career Expectation will 'somehow' be factored in to come up with the combine list while using our soon to be new JCBA (when it finally happens) in the decision process. You can call this Joint all you want, but at the end of the day, the MEC's will be watching very closely the JCBA process. Your fooling yourself if you don't think both sides 'conference' regularly with their members (MEC's & respective JNC members) at the table regarding the road to it's final product. After all, if the MEC's DON'T like what they see when the JNC hands down a TA for their review, it going to be mailed right back for 'further work'.....hint hint.

This should put the "J" back in your idea of the JCBA.....Skin for Skin on both sides.

 

Got it, thanks