Search
Notices

Windfall?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-15-2010, 06:14 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Default

Originally Posted by Airhoss View Post
Who of course will ALL be gone within several years! Same with the top 300 at CAl I'm sure. At which poiint we all move up and this becomes a mute point. The 1,000+ 70 seat RJs however will continue to destroy your career expectations for the rest of your life. Think about it.
I hear your point, but come on. There are 153 70 seaters flying the UAL code.
jsled is offline  
Old 11-15-2010, 06:57 AM
  #22  
Fore!
 
Tony Nelson's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 756 F/O
Posts: 505
Default

Originally Posted by jsled View Post
I hear your point, but come on. There are 153 70 seaters flying the UAL code.
That's 153 too many.
Tony Nelson is offline  
Old 11-15-2010, 06:19 PM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 178
Default

Originally Posted by Tony Nelson View Post
That's 153 too many.
Not too many, just the wrong people flying them.
Skyflyin is offline  
Old 11-15-2010, 07:59 PM
  #24  
Line Holder
 
Bph320's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: A320 Captain
Posts: 50
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48 View Post
So you're saying that the top 300 numbers should be reserved for UAL pilots?



just curious, if there are around 546 Captains at UAL on the 747/777 and about 154 or so at CAL on the 777, what is the best way to ratio in the top 700 pilots in your opinion?
Bph320 is offline  
Old 11-15-2010, 09:29 PM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Daytripper's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Capt. B737
Posts: 329
Default

just curious, if there are around 546 Captains at UAL on the 747/777 and about 154 or so at CAL on the 777, what is the best way to ratio in the top 700 pilots in your opinion?
Offer them an early out.
Daytripper is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 02:00 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Retired
Posts: 230
Default

Originally Posted by Bph320 View Post
just curious, if there are around 546 Captains at UAL on the 747/777 and about 154 or so at CAL on the 777, what is the best way to ratio in the top 700 pilots in your opinion?
According to December staffing, there are 190 captains on the B777 at CAL. The last system bid had 182 positions on the B777 and a further 41 captains have been awarded the B787 in anticipation of the first deliveries.

I don't know whether the UAL figures you quote are remotely accurate.

And remember, the B767 pays the same as the B777 at CAL and there are a couple hundred of them.

Also staffing at CAL is very lean when compared to UAL and if we were staffed according to the same formula as them, we probably would have 10 - 15 % more pilots in every category. Conversely, if UAL were staffed like CAL, they'd probably have 15 - 20% less pilots in each category!

Throw in career expectations, longevity, and the kitchen sink, and you have an interesting mix.

So, the short answer to your question is - I have no clue! Which is why - hopefully - a wise, just AND impartial panel, will have to figure it all out!
tailwheel48 is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 04:37 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48 View Post
and a further 41 captains have been awarded the B787

And remember, the B767 pays the same as the B777 at CAL

and there are a couple hundred of them.

and if we were staffed according to the same formula as them,

and the kitchen sink

and you have an interesting mix.
And remember at CAL our primary goal is to make UAL's wide bodies look like a



and their narrow bodies look like a




We need to get a JCBA outside of SLI concerns, and let the arbitration panel sort through the rest.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 04:57 AM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 165
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48 View Post
According to December staffing, there are 190 captains on the B777 at CAL. The last system bid had 182 positions on the B777 and a further 41 captains have been awarded the B787 in anticipation of the first deliveries.

I don't know whether the UAL figures you quote are remotely accurate.

And remember, the B767 pays the same as the B777 at CAL and there are a couple hundred of them.

Also staffing at CAL is very lean when compared to UAL and if we were staffed according to the same formula as them, we probably would have 10 - 15 % more pilots in every category. Conversely, if UAL were staffed like CAL, they'd probably have 15 - 20% less pilots in each category!

Throw in career expectations, longevity, and the kitchen sink, and you have an interesting mix.

So, the short answer to your question is - I have no clue! Which is why - hopefully - a wise, just AND impartial panel, will have to figure it all out!

This is what arbitrators in the past have said

1) airline A you have X number of planes with 2 aisles (widebodies) and you have Y number of planes with 1 aisle (narrowbodies)

2) airline B you have X number of planes with 2 aisles (widebodies) and you have Y number of planes with 1 aisle (narrowbodies)

This establishes a ratio for the planes ,then they move on to next step the ratio of pilot positions involving career expectations, thats where it gets messy.

An airlines orders have largely been ignored other than aircraft coming in the next few months, I will be surprised if the 787 orders from either airline will be recognized in the ruling with all the Boeing issues.
30west is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 05:24 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

30west,

I had a voluntary furlough asking about his status. I'm assuming this is where longevity would factored into the equation. There are pilots who took leaves of absence as well. Has ALPA defined longevity for the purpose of seniority integration or is it open to broad interpretation?
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 05:57 AM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Sunvox's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Default

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking View Post
30west,

I had a voluntary furlough asking about his status. I'm assuming this is where longevity would factored into the equation. There are pilots who took leaves of absence as well. Has ALPA defined longevity for the purpose of seniority integration or is it open to broad interpretation?

I'm not 30West, but lemme take a stab at it and see what ya think

1) ALPA merger policy does not deal with voluntary furloughs specifically nor define longevity in any precise sense with regards to the SLI process.
2) Recent descisions (read Nicolau and DAL/NW) have built their SLI without regard to voluntary furloughs, but have reinserted them into the new list one number ahead of the next pilot below them on the old seniority list after the new SL was finalized.
3) Everything is negotiable so nothing is written in stone.




P.S. I love the visuals in your post above!!

Last edited by Sunvox; 11-16-2010 at 06:22 AM.
Sunvox is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
brakechatter
Major
601
10-12-2010 11:54 AM
Sandhawk
Major
159
06-30-2009 11:44 AM
Carl Spackler
Mergers and Acquisitions
495
06-28-2008 06:11 PM
sailingfun
Mergers and Acquisitions
53
05-21-2008 07:48 PM
RockBottom
Major
11
10-23-2005 10:49 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices