CAL 170 LEC Update
10-03-2010, 12:33 PM
#1
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 24
CAL 170 LEC Update
Magenta Line
“We are starting today on our journey to become the world's leading airline...I've been very clear with all the work groups that we are creating wealth here, and I'm going to share that wealth...And we'll want to be an airline where people will actually want to fly us, and where employees want to work for us. I'd like to have employees beating down the doors to get a job here.” - Jeff Smisek
Today is Sunday, October 3, 2010, and we have four items for your review.
Item 1: Continental is an Industry Leader
We would like to start this week’s Magenta Line with a reminder to all of what Continental Airlines brings to the table in this merger. We hear persistent rumors that there are those who have not kept up with history, who continue to think of Continental as primarily a 737 “feeder” type of airline, rather than the global industry leader. The following is a dose of reality:
Our New York/Newark hub serves the second largest number of nonstop destinations of any U.S. Hub, right behind DAL's ATL hub, which is the world's largest. The latest figures from ALPA E&FA showed our EWR hub with 141 nonstop destinations, while the leading UAL hub at ORD only serves 90. Additionally, our EWR domicile, along with our IAH domicile, will continue to be the largest two domiciles in the combined system after the merger is complete.
Continental continues to board more NYC total passengers (EWR, JFK, LGA combined) than any other airline. DAL is second, JBLU is third, and AA is fourth. Even our primary Express carrier, Continental Express, is #5 in total NYC traffic. Continental is also of course the leader in NYC international passengers. UAL is nowhere to be found among the leaders. As measured by both nonstop destinations and total passengers boarded, Continental remains the leader in the largest, most important, and most lucrative air travel market in North America.
We bring a new fleet to the merger, with clean, fuel efficient aircraft. There is a very practical reason why our livery was chosen for the merged carrier – we brought most of the new, clean, fuel efficient aircraft to the party. Not only is the average age of our fleet much younger than most of the rest of the industry's, but our aircraft also tend to have much larger powerplants, higher gross weights and greater range, particularly our 757's and 777's. For example, United's low gross weight 757's and 777's, with their small Pratt and Whitney engines, cannot generate nearly as much revenue as ours do. We fly 757's all across higher yield markets such as Ireland, the UK, and northern and western Europe, from NEW YORK. We fly 777's mostly on long haul and ultra long haul flights to Delhi, Mumbai, Tel Aviv, Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong, etc, from NEW YORK.
Finally, a recent USAToday article showed four different ratings of airline quality. Continental was the # 1 global “legacy” airline in all four airline quality ratings.
Continental has remained an industry leader - by any measure - for the past decade. We should all be proud to be Continental pilots. Let us hope that the new United can rise to Continental's level via this merger.
Item 2: Loopholes and Mack Trucks
A Magenta Line item entitled “Loopholes and Mack Trucks” more than likely leads the EWR pilots to believe that the item will be an expose’ on management’s latest attempt to drive a Mack truck through a contract provision that has, until now, been interpreted in one way, but has now, suddenly, developed a “loophole”. If only that were the case. Unfortunately, this item is a response to the many emails and phone calls we have received regarding the disparate application of the CALMEC part time trip loss policy by some reps for their attendance at the ALPA Board of Directors meeting this month and its resulting cost to this pilot group’s union coffers. We’re sorry we even need to address this but many of our constituents are demanding answers and, of course, you deserve them.
Several years ago, the CALMEC trip loss policy was rewritten as a direct result of abuses of the policy in the past. We all know the stories- and the damage that certain interpretations of the policy did to the relationship of this pilot group with its MEC- we don’t need to rehash it. When the policy was revamped, the goal was to adequately compensate our volunteers, while removing the ability to manipulate schedules, through trading or bidding, to give volunteers and reps schedules with higher pay or more time off than were available to the very pilots they represent.
With the implementation of PBS, the policy states that known absences for paid union work will be pre-blocked at a line construction credit of 2:45 per day (the same value as most pilot absences) and a pay value of 5:15 per day. This is how your reps are paid and scheduled when they attend MEC meetings, along with unpaid travel days (2:45 credit, no pay) for the reps not living in the meeting location. The pre-blocking of days for union business is consistent with the rules applied to any pilot bidding a schedule at Continental and is meant to eliminate the ability (or temptation) for volunteers to maximize conflicts which result in higher pay and/or days off.
It is not a perfect system and, oftentimes, reps and volunteers get schedules with far fewer days off than they normally can hold- but that is more a reflection of the inadequate credit given for any pilot absence under our current contract and the pro-rating of days off, and not a reflection of the trip loss policy itself. It is also something we all knew of when we agreed to serve. It is next to impossible to write a policy that covers every situation and eliminates the possibility of abuse- if you recall, most of the abuses of the past were not “technically” against policy. Ultimately, any trip loss policy is only as stringent as the integrity of those who live under it.
For the first year we were on the MEC, all 9 reps abided by the pre-block provision and, as such, were paid and credited the same for union business. Unfortunately, that is apparently no longer the case. When the October bid awards came out and were published on the Flight Ops web page, our phones started ringing. The MEC travels to Florida this month to attend the bi-annual ALPA Board of Directors meeting and a concurrent MEC meeting. The meeting dates, published since July, are October 6-14th. For most of our reps, this resulted in 47:15 of trip loss pay for 9 days of union work, 30:15 in line building credit (assuming 2 unpaid travel days) and a schedule built according to the rule set governing the building of a schedule for any CAL pilot- pro-rated days off and all.
Apparently, two reps from another Council decided that they didn’t need to pre-block and, instead, bid a line and planned to attend the meeting after any conflicting trips were bought by the union. This goes against the intent of the policy as written, but that’s not the worst of it. While one rep’s schedule has minimal conflict and resulted in a trip loss fairly close to the rest of the MEC and a schedule of flying in the second half of the month consistent with the rest of the MEC, the other non-blocking rep bid in a way (to include waiving min days off between work blocks) that resulted in an entire monthly schedule of 4 trips, all in conflict with the meeting. As a result, this rep will have 4 trips (81+hours) bought by the union, an additional 38% override will be paid to the company (to repay B plan contributions, LTD premiums, etc) and this rep will have the rest of the month off. This is exactly the sort of abuse (albeit under a new bidding system) that happened before and resulted in the policy rewrite in the first place. Again, this may not “technically” go against policy- but it is not right and not fair to our fellow pilots who pay their dues money expecting better.
To say we are dismayed, disappointed and embarrassed would be an understatement. We know that you expect your MEC to be more transparent, more honest and more responsible with your trust. We have come a long way but it doesn’t take much to set us back. We have a fiduciary responsibility to your dues money and your EWR reps are careful with that every day. We believe that as long as our pilots are expected to pre-block absences (for military duty, training, vacation, etc) then we should follow the policy and pre-block our union absences, paid (MEC mtgs) or unpaid (LC mtgs). In that vein, neither of your EWR status reps, in the almost 2 years since we were elected, has filed a single expense reimbursement.
As long as you live under a contract that does not pay enough per diem to get a decent meal on a layover, we do not feel it is right to charge you for our meals or mileage or anything else - so we don’t. We minimize our trip loss and fly a full schedule around any union absence - like any other pilot in our base. The only trips we have bought are those in conflict with meetings that are scheduled after the bid award – a recent phenomenon due to the special meetings because of the merger. We will continue to conduct business this way- that is our commitment to you. You should expect nothing less.
As for this recent debacle - rest assured - it will be addressed at the next MEC meeting. We, as an MEC, have a responsibility to you and to each other to be transparent, responsible, and to police our own when necessary. We hate it when management drives their Mack trucks through “loopholes”- we don’t need to be doing it to ourselves! We’ll get it fixed and do better going forward - that’s what you guys deserve.
“We are starting today on our journey to become the world's leading airline...I've been very clear with all the work groups that we are creating wealth here, and I'm going to share that wealth...And we'll want to be an airline where people will actually want to fly us, and where employees want to work for us. I'd like to have employees beating down the doors to get a job here.” - Jeff Smisek
Today is Sunday, October 3, 2010, and we have four items for your review.
Item 1: Continental is an Industry Leader
We would like to start this week’s Magenta Line with a reminder to all of what Continental Airlines brings to the table in this merger. We hear persistent rumors that there are those who have not kept up with history, who continue to think of Continental as primarily a 737 “feeder” type of airline, rather than the global industry leader. The following is a dose of reality:
Our New York/Newark hub serves the second largest number of nonstop destinations of any U.S. Hub, right behind DAL's ATL hub, which is the world's largest. The latest figures from ALPA E&FA showed our EWR hub with 141 nonstop destinations, while the leading UAL hub at ORD only serves 90. Additionally, our EWR domicile, along with our IAH domicile, will continue to be the largest two domiciles in the combined system after the merger is complete.
Continental continues to board more NYC total passengers (EWR, JFK, LGA combined) than any other airline. DAL is second, JBLU is third, and AA is fourth. Even our primary Express carrier, Continental Express, is #5 in total NYC traffic. Continental is also of course the leader in NYC international passengers. UAL is nowhere to be found among the leaders. As measured by both nonstop destinations and total passengers boarded, Continental remains the leader in the largest, most important, and most lucrative air travel market in North America.
We bring a new fleet to the merger, with clean, fuel efficient aircraft. There is a very practical reason why our livery was chosen for the merged carrier – we brought most of the new, clean, fuel efficient aircraft to the party. Not only is the average age of our fleet much younger than most of the rest of the industry's, but our aircraft also tend to have much larger powerplants, higher gross weights and greater range, particularly our 757's and 777's. For example, United's low gross weight 757's and 777's, with their small Pratt and Whitney engines, cannot generate nearly as much revenue as ours do. We fly 757's all across higher yield markets such as Ireland, the UK, and northern and western Europe, from NEW YORK. We fly 777's mostly on long haul and ultra long haul flights to Delhi, Mumbai, Tel Aviv, Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong, etc, from NEW YORK.
Finally, a recent USAToday article showed four different ratings of airline quality. Continental was the # 1 global “legacy” airline in all four airline quality ratings.
Continental has remained an industry leader - by any measure - for the past decade. We should all be proud to be Continental pilots. Let us hope that the new United can rise to Continental's level via this merger.
Item 2: Loopholes and Mack Trucks
A Magenta Line item entitled “Loopholes and Mack Trucks” more than likely leads the EWR pilots to believe that the item will be an expose’ on management’s latest attempt to drive a Mack truck through a contract provision that has, until now, been interpreted in one way, but has now, suddenly, developed a “loophole”. If only that were the case. Unfortunately, this item is a response to the many emails and phone calls we have received regarding the disparate application of the CALMEC part time trip loss policy by some reps for their attendance at the ALPA Board of Directors meeting this month and its resulting cost to this pilot group’s union coffers. We’re sorry we even need to address this but many of our constituents are demanding answers and, of course, you deserve them.
Several years ago, the CALMEC trip loss policy was rewritten as a direct result of abuses of the policy in the past. We all know the stories- and the damage that certain interpretations of the policy did to the relationship of this pilot group with its MEC- we don’t need to rehash it. When the policy was revamped, the goal was to adequately compensate our volunteers, while removing the ability to manipulate schedules, through trading or bidding, to give volunteers and reps schedules with higher pay or more time off than were available to the very pilots they represent.
With the implementation of PBS, the policy states that known absences for paid union work will be pre-blocked at a line construction credit of 2:45 per day (the same value as most pilot absences) and a pay value of 5:15 per day. This is how your reps are paid and scheduled when they attend MEC meetings, along with unpaid travel days (2:45 credit, no pay) for the reps not living in the meeting location. The pre-blocking of days for union business is consistent with the rules applied to any pilot bidding a schedule at Continental and is meant to eliminate the ability (or temptation) for volunteers to maximize conflicts which result in higher pay and/or days off.
It is not a perfect system and, oftentimes, reps and volunteers get schedules with far fewer days off than they normally can hold- but that is more a reflection of the inadequate credit given for any pilot absence under our current contract and the pro-rating of days off, and not a reflection of the trip loss policy itself. It is also something we all knew of when we agreed to serve. It is next to impossible to write a policy that covers every situation and eliminates the possibility of abuse- if you recall, most of the abuses of the past were not “technically” against policy. Ultimately, any trip loss policy is only as stringent as the integrity of those who live under it.
For the first year we were on the MEC, all 9 reps abided by the pre-block provision and, as such, were paid and credited the same for union business. Unfortunately, that is apparently no longer the case. When the October bid awards came out and were published on the Flight Ops web page, our phones started ringing. The MEC travels to Florida this month to attend the bi-annual ALPA Board of Directors meeting and a concurrent MEC meeting. The meeting dates, published since July, are October 6-14th. For most of our reps, this resulted in 47:15 of trip loss pay for 9 days of union work, 30:15 in line building credit (assuming 2 unpaid travel days) and a schedule built according to the rule set governing the building of a schedule for any CAL pilot- pro-rated days off and all.
Apparently, two reps from another Council decided that they didn’t need to pre-block and, instead, bid a line and planned to attend the meeting after any conflicting trips were bought by the union. This goes against the intent of the policy as written, but that’s not the worst of it. While one rep’s schedule has minimal conflict and resulted in a trip loss fairly close to the rest of the MEC and a schedule of flying in the second half of the month consistent with the rest of the MEC, the other non-blocking rep bid in a way (to include waiving min days off between work blocks) that resulted in an entire monthly schedule of 4 trips, all in conflict with the meeting. As a result, this rep will have 4 trips (81+hours) bought by the union, an additional 38% override will be paid to the company (to repay B plan contributions, LTD premiums, etc) and this rep will have the rest of the month off. This is exactly the sort of abuse (albeit under a new bidding system) that happened before and resulted in the policy rewrite in the first place. Again, this may not “technically” go against policy- but it is not right and not fair to our fellow pilots who pay their dues money expecting better.
To say we are dismayed, disappointed and embarrassed would be an understatement. We know that you expect your MEC to be more transparent, more honest and more responsible with your trust. We have come a long way but it doesn’t take much to set us back. We have a fiduciary responsibility to your dues money and your EWR reps are careful with that every day. We believe that as long as our pilots are expected to pre-block absences (for military duty, training, vacation, etc) then we should follow the policy and pre-block our union absences, paid (MEC mtgs) or unpaid (LC mtgs). In that vein, neither of your EWR status reps, in the almost 2 years since we were elected, has filed a single expense reimbursement.
As long as you live under a contract that does not pay enough per diem to get a decent meal on a layover, we do not feel it is right to charge you for our meals or mileage or anything else - so we don’t. We minimize our trip loss and fly a full schedule around any union absence - like any other pilot in our base. The only trips we have bought are those in conflict with meetings that are scheduled after the bid award – a recent phenomenon due to the special meetings because of the merger. We will continue to conduct business this way- that is our commitment to you. You should expect nothing less.
As for this recent debacle - rest assured - it will be addressed at the next MEC meeting. We, as an MEC, have a responsibility to you and to each other to be transparent, responsible, and to police our own when necessary. We hate it when management drives their Mack trucks through “loopholes”- we don’t need to be doing it to ourselves! We’ll get it fixed and do better going forward - that’s what you guys deserve.
10-03-2010, 12:33 PM
#2
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 24
Item 3: Rumor Control
We’re starting a new recurring Magenta Line item called Rumor Control. Rumors spread just like the children’s game of telephone, in which a group of children sit in a circle, and the first child whispers a made up statement to the child sitting right next to them. Then the second child in turn passes on what they believe they heard to the child sitting right next to them. By the time the original statement goes full circle and comes back to the original child, the message usually in no way resembles the initial statement.
Unlike the game of telephone, rumors can be a damaging tool that management can use to create uncertainly and disunity within a work group. During this merger timeline, everyone is hungry for information and at the same time can be somewhat anxious and apprehensive about our futures. There seems to always be an information void, and management can and will take advantage of this window of opportunity to create an atmosphere conducive to divide and conquer tactics. Two of the three rumors we are addressing today were started by management and, like most rumors, these two rumors have no truth behind them, but they can nevertheless be very damaging.
Rumor - The company wants to create a new early out retirement program.
Answer - False. This rumor stems mostly from the training department, where many instructors say they have heard directly from or spoken to someone who has heard directly from Fred Abbott that his goal is to make this a reality. Well, if Fred feels this way, he certainly hasn’t communicated so to anyone within the union leadership or to our Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) that sits directly across the table from Fred on most days of almost every week.
Rumor - The CAL MEC Officers have voted themselves a pay raise.
Answer - False. First, no MEC Officer has ever suggested such a thing and, second, even if they did, they do not have the ability to vote themselves a raise, because the MEC Officers do not vote. Only the nine voting MEC Representatives (The eight CA and FO status representatives from the four domiciles and the single voting Flight Instructor Representative) vote within our MEC structure. This has not occurred and will not occur. Interestingly, this rumor can be traced as having started directly inside the EWR CPO.
Rumor – The union or the company wants to zero out our sick leave.
Answer – False. The ALPA Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) has no such provision within our Sick leave section proposal to the company. The company has made no indications of requesting such a provision. This rumor may stem from the fact that this did occur at NWA with the Delta/NWA merger. Delta has always had a different sick leave system and they incorporated this system to be included the DAL/NWA JCBA.
If you hear of any rumors that are circulating amongst the pilot group and you want clarification of the real facts, please e-mail that rumor to one of the LEC 170 Officers. Thank you.
Item: 4 Chairman’s Editorial
At one of our Special MEC meetings last summer, we passed a very important resolution. We decided, just like the UAL MEC to include our nonvoting LEC Secretary/Treasurers, plus the nonvoting LEC Flight Instructor Vice Chairman, to attend all MEC meetings in which the Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and/or the Integrated Seniority List (ISL) discussions were to take place. Tara and I extremely happy to have our very own Captain Boyens, as well as all other non-status representatives' voices heard during this critical juncture in our careers. It goes without saying that Captain Boyens brings a wealth of knowledge to the MEC table and, although he has no vote as a non status representative, his voice carries tremendous weight and influence within our MEC.
On Monday September 20th, our MEC met in Denver with the entire UAL MEC, for our first joint MEC Meeting. We agree with the UAL MEC in principal on our four contractual cornerstones:
· Scope/Outsourcing (Job Protection)
· Compensation
· Work Rules
· Retirement
Unfortunately, at present we do have at least one minor disagreement in one component of the core cornerstone item of compensation. We also disagree regarding a dispute resolution procedure, should each respective side of the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) and the MEC Chairmen be unable to agree on a specific area of our proposed JCBA sections.
I am very proud of how our MEC communicated to the UAL MEC, in no uncertain terms, that if we the CAL MEC have a JCBA Tentative Agreement in front of us that does not meet our expectations, we will have no problem voting the T/A down by a 9-0 margin. We also stated that, if the only way we can achieve our core contractual JCBA goals is through a long and protracted JCBA negotiations process, while this would not be our first choice, then so be it!
To those who believe your MEC has been steam rolled by the UAL MEC, nothing could be further from the truth. We are a world class airline and we will not be treated like second class citizens by anyone. As explained in item one today, we are at the very least equal partners with our UAL MEC counterparts. In fact one could make an effective argument that at present the pendulum swings more in our direction.
I want to make no bones about my stance regarding the eventual T/A on our JCBA. I have a standing NO vote. What does that mean? It means that I have to be overwhelmed by the overall product of the JCBA, in order to change my standing NO vote to a yes vote, rather than having to be convinced on why to vote NO, as many of our former MEC Representatives have stood in the past. This contract has far too many career implications to our pilots for me to think in any other way.
In closing, I have a message for our CEO Mr. Smisek. I have read many reports quoting your desire to make the new United a world class industry leading airline for not only our customers, but also for the employees who work here. I am glad you feel that way, as you really do have a once in a lifetime opportunity to make your vision a reality. I will remind you, however, that you have a limited window of opportunity to bring your vision to fruition. If you think you can do so on the backs of our employees, most specifically your pilots, you will surely fail. I will also remind you of what I said to you when you last visited our MEC last Spring. Our pilot group is just as militant as the United pilot group and we will do whatever we can to legally bear pressure on you to achieve our contractual goals. You are clearly at a fork in the road. I implore you to take the appropriate turn.
That is all for today. Please remember we have 147 pilots and their families on furlough.
Fraternally,
Chairman Captain Jayson Baron
[email protected]
(610) 442-3817
Vice Chairman First Officer Tara Cook
[email protected]
(610) 220-8904
Secretary/Treasurer Captain Tim Boyens
[email protected]
(305) 519-5588
We’re starting a new recurring Magenta Line item called Rumor Control. Rumors spread just like the children’s game of telephone, in which a group of children sit in a circle, and the first child whispers a made up statement to the child sitting right next to them. Then the second child in turn passes on what they believe they heard to the child sitting right next to them. By the time the original statement goes full circle and comes back to the original child, the message usually in no way resembles the initial statement.
Unlike the game of telephone, rumors can be a damaging tool that management can use to create uncertainly and disunity within a work group. During this merger timeline, everyone is hungry for information and at the same time can be somewhat anxious and apprehensive about our futures. There seems to always be an information void, and management can and will take advantage of this window of opportunity to create an atmosphere conducive to divide and conquer tactics. Two of the three rumors we are addressing today were started by management and, like most rumors, these two rumors have no truth behind them, but they can nevertheless be very damaging.
Rumor - The company wants to create a new early out retirement program.
Answer - False. This rumor stems mostly from the training department, where many instructors say they have heard directly from or spoken to someone who has heard directly from Fred Abbott that his goal is to make this a reality. Well, if Fred feels this way, he certainly hasn’t communicated so to anyone within the union leadership or to our Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) that sits directly across the table from Fred on most days of almost every week.
Rumor - The CAL MEC Officers have voted themselves a pay raise.
Answer - False. First, no MEC Officer has ever suggested such a thing and, second, even if they did, they do not have the ability to vote themselves a raise, because the MEC Officers do not vote. Only the nine voting MEC Representatives (The eight CA and FO status representatives from the four domiciles and the single voting Flight Instructor Representative) vote within our MEC structure. This has not occurred and will not occur. Interestingly, this rumor can be traced as having started directly inside the EWR CPO.
Rumor – The union or the company wants to zero out our sick leave.
Answer – False. The ALPA Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) has no such provision within our Sick leave section proposal to the company. The company has made no indications of requesting such a provision. This rumor may stem from the fact that this did occur at NWA with the Delta/NWA merger. Delta has always had a different sick leave system and they incorporated this system to be included the DAL/NWA JCBA.
If you hear of any rumors that are circulating amongst the pilot group and you want clarification of the real facts, please e-mail that rumor to one of the LEC 170 Officers. Thank you.
Item: 4 Chairman’s Editorial
At one of our Special MEC meetings last summer, we passed a very important resolution. We decided, just like the UAL MEC to include our nonvoting LEC Secretary/Treasurers, plus the nonvoting LEC Flight Instructor Vice Chairman, to attend all MEC meetings in which the Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and/or the Integrated Seniority List (ISL) discussions were to take place. Tara and I extremely happy to have our very own Captain Boyens, as well as all other non-status representatives' voices heard during this critical juncture in our careers. It goes without saying that Captain Boyens brings a wealth of knowledge to the MEC table and, although he has no vote as a non status representative, his voice carries tremendous weight and influence within our MEC.
On Monday September 20th, our MEC met in Denver with the entire UAL MEC, for our first joint MEC Meeting. We agree with the UAL MEC in principal on our four contractual cornerstones:
· Scope/Outsourcing (Job Protection)
· Compensation
· Work Rules
· Retirement
Unfortunately, at present we do have at least one minor disagreement in one component of the core cornerstone item of compensation. We also disagree regarding a dispute resolution procedure, should each respective side of the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) and the MEC Chairmen be unable to agree on a specific area of our proposed JCBA sections.
I am very proud of how our MEC communicated to the UAL MEC, in no uncertain terms, that if we the CAL MEC have a JCBA Tentative Agreement in front of us that does not meet our expectations, we will have no problem voting the T/A down by a 9-0 margin. We also stated that, if the only way we can achieve our core contractual JCBA goals is through a long and protracted JCBA negotiations process, while this would not be our first choice, then so be it!
To those who believe your MEC has been steam rolled by the UAL MEC, nothing could be further from the truth. We are a world class airline and we will not be treated like second class citizens by anyone. As explained in item one today, we are at the very least equal partners with our UAL MEC counterparts. In fact one could make an effective argument that at present the pendulum swings more in our direction.
I want to make no bones about my stance regarding the eventual T/A on our JCBA. I have a standing NO vote. What does that mean? It means that I have to be overwhelmed by the overall product of the JCBA, in order to change my standing NO vote to a yes vote, rather than having to be convinced on why to vote NO, as many of our former MEC Representatives have stood in the past. This contract has far too many career implications to our pilots for me to think in any other way.
In closing, I have a message for our CEO Mr. Smisek. I have read many reports quoting your desire to make the new United a world class industry leading airline for not only our customers, but also for the employees who work here. I am glad you feel that way, as you really do have a once in a lifetime opportunity to make your vision a reality. I will remind you, however, that you have a limited window of opportunity to bring your vision to fruition. If you think you can do so on the backs of our employees, most specifically your pilots, you will surely fail. I will also remind you of what I said to you when you last visited our MEC last Spring. Our pilot group is just as militant as the United pilot group and we will do whatever we can to legally bear pressure on you to achieve our contractual goals. You are clearly at a fork in the road. I implore you to take the appropriate turn.
That is all for today. Please remember we have 147 pilots and their families on furlough.
Fraternally,
Chairman Captain Jayson Baron
[email protected]
(610) 442-3817
Vice Chairman First Officer Tara Cook
[email protected]
(610) 220-8904
Secretary/Treasurer Captain Tim Boyens
[email protected]
(305) 519-5588
10-03-2010, 02:40 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
Dear Jayson,
It appears you have a case of inferiority complex. Using the "mines bigger than yours argument" is bit over the top. Jayson you point out that UAL was not as big as CAl in EWR. Well Jayson, where did CAL rank at IAD, ORD, DEN, SFO? Glad you guys are big in EWR, congratulations, you don't have to worry about this UA pilot ever going there.
Jayson your jab at the lightweight UA airplanes is laughable. See Jayson, UA flies exclusively 3class 767-300's and B777 to Europe versus the squeezer 757's you guys fly. We try to use the right tool for the job. I wouldn't hoe my garden with a spoon if I had access to a tractor. While that may make sense to you guys in EWR it doesn't to me. Also, we get that F class seat for rest and some contractual time constraints that are better than you FAR limits
Finally, Jayson you forgot to mention the 700+ undesirables you are bringing to the party. You have us beat in that department too. Might as well post all those things since you are making a list. In the meantime I am sure you didn't get enough attention as a child. Let me be the first to acknowledge just how special you are.
If this is CAL's LEC 170 attempt at unity with the UA pilots it was a miserable fail. Certainly hope this is not a precursor of things to come.
L
It appears you have a case of inferiority complex. Using the "mines bigger than yours argument" is bit over the top. Jayson you point out that UAL was not as big as CAl in EWR. Well Jayson, where did CAL rank at IAD, ORD, DEN, SFO? Glad you guys are big in EWR, congratulations, you don't have to worry about this UA pilot ever going there.
Jayson your jab at the lightweight UA airplanes is laughable. See Jayson, UA flies exclusively 3class 767-300's and B777 to Europe versus the squeezer 757's you guys fly. We try to use the right tool for the job. I wouldn't hoe my garden with a spoon if I had access to a tractor. While that may make sense to you guys in EWR it doesn't to me. Also, we get that F class seat for rest and some contractual time constraints that are better than you FAR limits
Finally, Jayson you forgot to mention the 700+ undesirables you are bringing to the party. You have us beat in that department too. Might as well post all those things since you are making a list. In the meantime I am sure you didn't get enough attention as a child. Let me be the first to acknowledge just how special you are.
If this is CAL's LEC 170 attempt at unity with the UA pilots it was a miserable fail. Certainly hope this is not a precursor of things to come.
L
Last edited by Lambourne; 10-03-2010 at 06:38 PM.
10-03-2010, 03:18 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 230
Chin up Lambourne. That message has the sound bite of Napoleonic shortcomings to me.
'To those who believe your MEC has been steam rolled by the UAL MEC, nothing could be further from the truth. We are a world class airline and we will not be treated like second class citizens by anyone. As explained in item one today, we are at the very least equal partners with our UAL MEC counterparts. In fact one could make an effective argument that at present the pendulum swings more in our direction.'
The above quote from is a perfect example of how not to win friends and influence enemies. It's his LEC rag and he can say what he wants.
I for one am looking forward to working with the CAL pilots and messages like this are filed in the trash can.
Fritz
'To those who believe your MEC has been steam rolled by the UAL MEC, nothing could be further from the truth. We are a world class airline and we will not be treated like second class citizens by anyone. As explained in item one today, we are at the very least equal partners with our UAL MEC counterparts. In fact one could make an effective argument that at present the pendulum swings more in our direction.'
The above quote from is a perfect example of how not to win friends and influence enemies. It's his LEC rag and he can say what he wants.
I for one am looking forward to working with the CAL pilots and messages like this are filed in the trash can.
Fritz
Last edited by Fritzthepilot; 10-03-2010 at 04:49 PM.
10-03-2010, 06:47 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by Coto Pilot
With all of the talk about the need for unity, this is incredibly devisive, and coming from an MEC member.
My comment to Jayson would be the first half of the CAL mantra. So Jayson may I share a large FU to you and the other officers of 170. Now I have an additional 3 CAL pilots that I won't share a beverage with on a layover, in addition to the 700+ guys from the picture page.
L
10-03-2010, 07:25 PM
#8
Keep Calm Chive ON
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Lambourne,
He left you his name, email, and phone number. Instead voicing a message on anonymous board, why not attempt to 'speak' with him personally??
Just say'in.....
He left you his name, email, and phone number. Instead voicing a message on anonymous board, why not attempt to 'speak' with him personally??
Just say'in.....
10-03-2010, 08:07 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
Why bother...
Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
Lambourne,
He left you his name, email, and phone number. Instead voicing a message on anonymous board, why not attempt to 'speak' with him personally??
Just say'in.....
He left you his name, email, and phone number. Instead voicing a message on anonymous board, why not attempt to 'speak' with him personally??
Just say'in.....
If Capt Baron demonstrates that lack of restraint in an LEC update, I wouldn't bother. That type of bravado needs to be kept to off the record discussions during meetings and not disseminated to the masses which include UAL pilots in this electronic age.
I would rather read the joint CAL and UAL MEC press release following the merger closing. He should keep his diatribe to the closed door sessions he attends as an MEC member.
Yes, I would expect him to step on rumors without merit regardless of the subject to placate the LEC members. Just not in that fashion.
FWIW.
Frats,
Lee
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
