UAL MEC message - 11/1/10
#61
Significant pay raise, I think just looking quick it would be around $3 per increase where I am sitting unless I have your payrates wrong. Wow and should we throw in your work rules? No thanks. As far as Wendy making her comments posted, did she do that, no she sent us an e-mail to keep us informed.
I am just trying to sit back and let the process play out but of you coming on here like your words are gospel. Let it play out and try for the best for our entire group. JMHO
I am just trying to sit back and let the process play out but of you coming on here like your words are gospel. Let it play out and try for the best for our entire group. JMHO
#62
ALPA: The Pilots Union
147 Pilots On The Street
November 2, 2010
*
Yesterday, the UAL MEC Chairman and UAL local council representatives put out a series of strident blastmails on the subject of the JCBA, SLI and the union’s compensation proposal. In these communications, they seek to place blame on your MEC and its officers for not yet having reached agreement on a JCBA. We are taken to task for being honest about our intent to hold firm in our insistence that a fair and equitable seniority list integration process be followed. They cry foul that we have adamantly held that ALPA merger policy must be adhered to and that the Protocol agreement agreed to by both MECs be followed in its entirety. (The Protocol is available on the CAL MEC Web site.) Please allow me to clear up some of the many inaccuracies contained in yesterday’s UAL communications.
The issue we face today with the compensation section is really quite simple. We were told several months ago by UAL MEC members that they had passed a resolution mandating that the B-747 be given premier aircraft status when the aircraft pay groupings were designed. In short, the UAL MEC wanted the B-747 to be the singular aircraft in the highest aircraft category for pay purposes. We had different ideas and insisted that an approach that created the most pay for the most pilots be considered. This issue came to a head in September at a joint session of the two MECs where, at the direction of our MEC, I advised the UAL MEC that we were not interested in the UAL methodology and that we favored allowing the Joint Negotiating Committee to work, unfettered by SLI considerations, on a solution that would be best suited for all CAL and UAL pilots.
Although the UAL MEC did not initially agree to this tack, eventually with the help of ALPA National the JNC was allowed to proceed with formulating a solution absent any SLI consideration. They did so after a few days of work in October. The JNC agreed on the solution, the two MEC chairs agreed on the solution and the CAL MEC agreed on the solution. The UAL MEC said no. With this stalemate hanging over our heads, we received management’s compensation proposal last week. Again, following the meetings with management, the JNC met in an attempt to come up with suitable aircraft groupings. Again, the JNC reached consensus on a proposal to be used to counter management’s proposal. I can only assume, based on yesterday’s missives from UAL, that yet again, the UAL MEC has rejected the JNC’s work. It is very clear that the problem is not with the CAL MEC or the JNC. The problem rests solely with the UAL MEC and their insistence that the compensation proposal enhance their SLI argument.
To further complicate matters, the UAL MEC has proposed a resolution to the ALPA Executive Council suggesting that the Council mandate that the JCBA cannot be used in the SLI arbitration. In essence, the UAL MEC wants to restrict the arbitration panel from hearing the whole truth. They want to carve out parts we believe would be necessary for the arbitrators to understand both pilot groups’ full stories. We will, of course, fight for the truth to be told in its unvarnished entirety.
Interestingly, while Capt. Morse holds up the new DAL contract as the model in her blastmail, she doesn’t acknowledge that the DAL contract has identical pay for the B-747 and B-777 aircraft: exactly what the JNC had proposed and she herself had approved for her MEC’s consideration. Unable to convince anyone of the merits of an irrational argument, now Capt. Morse and the UAL MEC are trying what can best be described as an attempt to shift blame from themselves by providing their pilots inaccurate information.
The CAL MEC believes that ALPA merger policy and the protocols we have agreed upon should be followed as we work to negotiate a JCBA and then an integrated seniority list. The CAL MEC is upholding our agreement – to leave the SLI and JCBA as separate processes. To carve out pay rates (or anything else for that matter), would be the antithesis of those agreements.
To our pilots, the UAL MEC, the United pilots, and to the UAL MEC officers, we will continue to honor the agreements that we have made regarding the JCBA and the SLI processes. We urge you to let these agreed upon processes work as they were designed so that we all can begin to reap the benefits of a new collective bargaining agreement. The goals we established many months ago have not changed. Together, we must work to reach*agreement on a new contract that meets or exceeds the demands of our pilot group and to achieve a fair and equitable seniority list integration.
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman
147 Pilots On The Street
November 2, 2010
*
Yesterday, the UAL MEC Chairman and UAL local council representatives put out a series of strident blastmails on the subject of the JCBA, SLI and the union’s compensation proposal. In these communications, they seek to place blame on your MEC and its officers for not yet having reached agreement on a JCBA. We are taken to task for being honest about our intent to hold firm in our insistence that a fair and equitable seniority list integration process be followed. They cry foul that we have adamantly held that ALPA merger policy must be adhered to and that the Protocol agreement agreed to by both MECs be followed in its entirety. (The Protocol is available on the CAL MEC Web site.) Please allow me to clear up some of the many inaccuracies contained in yesterday’s UAL communications.
The issue we face today with the compensation section is really quite simple. We were told several months ago by UAL MEC members that they had passed a resolution mandating that the B-747 be given premier aircraft status when the aircraft pay groupings were designed. In short, the UAL MEC wanted the B-747 to be the singular aircraft in the highest aircraft category for pay purposes. We had different ideas and insisted that an approach that created the most pay for the most pilots be considered. This issue came to a head in September at a joint session of the two MECs where, at the direction of our MEC, I advised the UAL MEC that we were not interested in the UAL methodology and that we favored allowing the Joint Negotiating Committee to work, unfettered by SLI considerations, on a solution that would be best suited for all CAL and UAL pilots.
Although the UAL MEC did not initially agree to this tack, eventually with the help of ALPA National the JNC was allowed to proceed with formulating a solution absent any SLI consideration. They did so after a few days of work in October. The JNC agreed on the solution, the two MEC chairs agreed on the solution and the CAL MEC agreed on the solution. The UAL MEC said no. With this stalemate hanging over our heads, we received management’s compensation proposal last week. Again, following the meetings with management, the JNC met in an attempt to come up with suitable aircraft groupings. Again, the JNC reached consensus on a proposal to be used to counter management’s proposal. I can only assume, based on yesterday’s missives from UAL, that yet again, the UAL MEC has rejected the JNC’s work. It is very clear that the problem is not with the CAL MEC or the JNC. The problem rests solely with the UAL MEC and their insistence that the compensation proposal enhance their SLI argument.
To further complicate matters, the UAL MEC has proposed a resolution to the ALPA Executive Council suggesting that the Council mandate that the JCBA cannot be used in the SLI arbitration. In essence, the UAL MEC wants to restrict the arbitration panel from hearing the whole truth. They want to carve out parts we believe would be necessary for the arbitrators to understand both pilot groups’ full stories. We will, of course, fight for the truth to be told in its unvarnished entirety.
Interestingly, while Capt. Morse holds up the new DAL contract as the model in her blastmail, she doesn’t acknowledge that the DAL contract has identical pay for the B-747 and B-777 aircraft: exactly what the JNC had proposed and she herself had approved for her MEC’s consideration. Unable to convince anyone of the merits of an irrational argument, now Capt. Morse and the UAL MEC are trying what can best be described as an attempt to shift blame from themselves by providing their pilots inaccurate information.
The CAL MEC believes that ALPA merger policy and the protocols we have agreed upon should be followed as we work to negotiate a JCBA and then an integrated seniority list. The CAL MEC is upholding our agreement – to leave the SLI and JCBA as separate processes. To carve out pay rates (or anything else for that matter), would be the antithesis of those agreements.
To our pilots, the UAL MEC, the United pilots, and to the UAL MEC officers, we will continue to honor the agreements that we have made regarding the JCBA and the SLI processes. We urge you to let these agreed upon processes work as they were designed so that we all can begin to reap the benefits of a new collective bargaining agreement. The goals we established many months ago have not changed. Together, we must work to reach*agreement on a new contract that meets or exceeds the demands of our pilot group and to achieve a fair and equitable seniority list integration.
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman
#64
#65
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 0
From: A320 Cap
The one problem Wendy is why can't you get your own people all going the same direction. I mean the jnc approved a compensation proposal and now she doesn't like it? Didn't the ual mec put those people on the jnc? Don't they communicate? Now that she doesn't like the outcome she publicly calls out the cal mec. Seems like amateur hour over there. My gut feeling is ual wants the pat raises of a new contract faster than the cal guys. Seems like the ual mec was lovey dovey with the cal side when we agreed to hire their pilots from furlough.
My guess is that Wendy will be getting a lot of emails saying "just get this fukxr done!". Our message boards have pages of replies stating "take your time guys, no hurry". We can fly under our contract and our equipment indefinitely. As long as the creep of dozens of ual no scope 70 seaters aren't officially let into our base. Even the furloughed ual guys won't be in a hurry because they will be flying for cal very soon.
Hold on there hoss.... I wouldn't get too righteous about "why can't you get your people going in the same direction". You might want to re-read your magenta line. Doesn't sound like the CAL MEC is exactly unified right now either.
Second, too late. Skywest just opened a 70 seat RJ Houston base. Oh, and UAL just replaced a bunch of 70 seaters in SEA. The shift has begun, and you guys are definitely on the losing end of the flow of 70 seaters. If you guys are smart over there, you'll want what we want. GET A NEW CONTRACT DONE. Get some good raises, improvements in QOL and SCOPE and do it soon.
I'm sick of the he said/she said. Every email, magenta line, and update that comes out like that hurts us ALL in the long run because it takes away from what should be our REAL focus, being unified. BOTH sides are guilty.
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
From: 737 capt
Bumped, you got that right. As long as this internal fight is going on, UAL mgt is going to do whatever they want, ie 70 seaters now going to IAH. Time to get the eye back on the ball boys and girls.
#67
On Reserve
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Guess what, I at one time worked at CAL and remember when some of my fellow pilots wanted to burn down the place there also. So what?
P.S. FYI It was a good decision to go to UAL looking back. I'm guessing you've only been there since Bethune was running the show , he came after I left and from what I'm told really turned it around. It wasn't a good place to work prior to that.
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: B-777 left
$30 bucks an hour on 76 hour guarantee where I'm sitting. And if we all fall to your scope we would be lucky to be in the same seat or even on the active list. The magenta line was for a local base. But of course everything is on the Internet immediately. Do you think they don't know they are writing for everyone now that they have seen how it works? But you are right, sit back and relax. My posts were not to put down or put up any side. Just to show what is bs and what isn't. Let it all play out as you say and be as skeptical of your own side as the other. But now we sit and watch our elected leaders work. Our only voice now is on the ta.
#70
Wow, what an uninformed and innaccurate post. Look your numbers up. Look up the UAL numbers while you are throwing the scab word around. Its funny how every thirteen year old with an avatar of a jet thinks he is a major airline pilot.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



