Coto Pilot

The issue of banding or not banding aircraft types is a no brainer, banding costs jobs by reducing movement and training. This was supposed to be our one big opportunity to fix our collective contracts and the Continental MEC wants to shoot us all in the foot because they are worried about it effecting the SLI.

AxlF16

That is simply FALSE. I haven't seen anything from our LEC/MEC that even remotely resembles the pointless tripe from the EWR LEC Capt rep. I haven't even HEARD anything like that from my own reps over the phone! If I did, you can bet that I would tell them to CEASE AND DESIST the public clown act!! I will tell you with ALL honestly that I haven't talked to a single UA pilot that is looking to gain seniority at the expense of you guys. Everyone wants a FAIR integration with little or no drama. But not Jayson apparently.... Say what you want, but he is doing a great disservice to all CAL pilots by broadcasting his testosterone for all to see. If you want to convey a message in private, do it over the phone or in person. Any expectation that his written word would not get to UAL pilots is naive at best, deceitful at worst.

EWRflyr

As was said earlier, you can bet both sides are doing exactly the same thing. The UAL pilots are going to do things to try to get the upper hand in the SLI, as will the CAL pilots. I wouldn't expect anything less from either side WHEN IT COMES TIME TO THE SLI. However, regarding the JCBA, SLI shouldn't be a consideration when trying to negotiate a new contract for us all. At that table we are allies. At the SLI table we should be adversaries. Neither side should be trying to tackle SLI issues via the JCBA negotiations.

Get the JCBA done. Move on to the SLI talks. Reach an impasse and then move on to binding arbitration. Both sides present ALL the information they feel is appropriate to make the case FOR their position and AGAINST the other side. Let the arbitrator make his ruling. Simple as that.

I will agree that at times Jayson writes and comes across a bit "intense" shall we say. However, having dealt with him, he has answered my questions, he does care about the pilots vs. the company and is definitely an ally you want to have. I believe wholeheartedly that when the UAL integration takes full effect you will see a strong advocate for ALL the UAL pilots.

EWRflyr

OK, please explain this to me. My understanding is the issue here is the 777 and the 747 being banded together for pay.

While I understand and get behind a separate pay category for the 747 given weight, banding this airplane as into a "widebody" category for pay is not going to cost jobs. They are separate type ratings and qualifications. Just like our 777s and 767s are banded for pay purposes, they are still separate type ratings requiring different staffing. Same with our 757s and 737-800/900s...large narrow body.

The only banding for staffing occurs on the 757 and 767 here at CAL. Again, my understanding is this whole banding issue is related to PAY of the 747.

AxlF16

But certain issues inherent in our JCBA can (or could) affect SLI issues if looked at from a paranoid perspective. THAT'S when we should expect our MECs to work together to find the BEST approach in a collaborative manner --NOT become entrenched in the WRONG battle. For example, look at the pay banding issue... The design of the payscale has HUGE ramifications on the future of the pilot group. WE BETTER GET IT RIGHT! If we fong it up because we are focused on possible SLI effects, but it ends up hurting us later -- well that is plain stupid. I don't know the right answer, but the decision on structuring our pay is a STRATEGIC one, not tactical.

Somebody PLEASE answer these questions.

If UAL buys the A380, what would the pay be under the current CAL contract??

WHEN UAL takes delivery of the A350s, what is the pay under the current UAL contract??

What does the 787 pay under the current CAL contract??

What will the 787 pay under the current UAL contract??


The 70-110 seaters open up a whole 'nuther can of worms.
BL--Don't f*ck up my payscales because you're fighting the WRONG battle.

757Driver

I completely disagree Coto. By putting both the 777 and the 747 together, we secure a higher rate for the 777. Smisek has made it no secret that he hates the 747, (see parking one in the 4th quarter), and will be getting rid of all of them sooner rather than later. Why not get the aircraft that will be sticking around in the higher pay category and call it a day?

SoCalGuy

Coto has said this before on multiple occasions. I've called it out as "baseless", and have asked for an explanation as to how it will 'cost jobs under banded pay'??

Just claims he's made thus far with no evidence to even substantiate his reasoning.

I don't buy it either. Hate to drag out the "S" word, "Carved Out" B747 scale ONLY bodes we'll for 'old' UAL pilots in JCBA and SLI.....very little/to nothing for the 'old' CAL guys to gain.

Captain Bligh

Sounds like Smisek has been paying a lot of attention to his former CAL flight ops people, most of whom have expressed open contempt toward the 747 for the past 12-14 years. One in particular comes to mind (whose son also works for the airline), that has some sort of odd body language, facial contortion every time he hears "747".

SoCalGuy

Oh come on now!!
By chance, you wouldn't be referring to someone who receives an exorbitant salary to do nothing but write "Pilot Bulletins"/Memo's would you???

Coto Pilot

The banding of aircraft occured at United during a concessionary period because the company demanded it. That alone should be reason enough for the pilots to want it unbanded. All aircraft types should be unbanded, not just the 400/777. Pilots at airlines that pay to longevity alone do not change aircraft types because there is no financial incentive to. When we are paid to a specific aircraft type, we chase the paycheck and change equipment frequently. Pilots used to go from right seat of the 737 to 727 to 757 to the DC 10 and then the 747. When they could hold it they would start again in the left seat of the 737 and make the same progression from the other side. Obviously some would hang out longer in a seat, and others would jump at the first chance to get in the left seat. The point is when a 747 captain would retire, a 777 captain (or DC10), would then move in to that vacancy, and 757/767 captain would move into the 777 vacancy etc. With banding aircraft types, the motivation to move isn't there and pilots don't change nearly as often. This either keeps pilots on the street, or puts them there. The 747 will eventually be replaced by either the A380 or the 747-800 or whatever else Boeing and Airbus come up with. Are you saying that if and when the A380 or other comparable aircraft come on the property we should just band it together with the 777/400 because that is the biggest we have? Demand industry leading pay for all aircraft types individually.