bogeydriver

Didn't see the survey results. What is the plan for retirees? My input was straight DOH.

luv757

There is no plan as of yet. The pass policy is forthcoming. All that was posted was the results of the survey. FWIW it was basically a 50/50 split on retirees going ahead of an active employee. It also was an overwhelmingly negative response against any higher boarding priority for "managers and supervisors".

bogeydriver

Can't remember the password assigned. Can you tell me what the consensus was for retirees? My input was straight DOH for boarding priority, regardless of active/retired status.

iahflyr

Straight DOH

It's simple, easy, and it makes sense.

fireman0174

As a retiree, implementation of DOH favors me since I hired on at UAL in 1965. But that really isn't fair. Total longevity is what I think is fair. How many years did one work at the company (UAL and/or CAL combined), either in total prior to retirement or what's been accrued for an active employee up to that point in time should, IMO, be the criteria.

I have 38 total years of service at UAL. DOH as I see it would cause me to "accure" extra service credit after I retired and that would not be proper. I retired 7 years ago - no way should I have 45 years of longevity.

Under no circumstances do I think it appropriate for active employees ahead of retirees solely on that basis. Pass privileges is a method to acknowledge the contributions made to the carrier(s) during one's career, even it the real value is worth far less than it used to be due to load factors so industry wide high.

For the record, I have used my travel passes exactly once since retirement.

EWRflyr

Oh, so true. With all the questions about supervisors getting an enhanced priority, I think they were probably surprised that the results were so firmly NO in that category. There was no ambiguity in that answer, unlike the split in some of the others. Now we shall see if we really do have a say in the NEW policy.

thor2j

U need to double check the results. It's 4:1 retirees going after employees. The 50/50 is where they would fit AFTER employees.

EWRflyr

Those privileges for our contributions have been eroded steadily over the years to be almost worthless at this point. Using employees as a revenue stream to get a seat that would go empty is a joke.

bearcat

I'm sorry, but retirees should not be in front of active employees. That is BS.

SoCalGuy

Not really a surprise, just do the numbers.

If you'd look, there were 60K+ participants in that 'Whiskey Delta' survey. The ratio of "worker-bee's" to "supervisor/mgt types" in the combine company would greatly favor the 'lowly worker'. You, I, and just about everyone else w/o the supervisor status (SA1 in CAL speak) said "heck NO".....surprising??

Think again.

Eitherway, that $h1T's gotta go.