CAL Replacing UAL flying, not new flying
05-23-2011 | 03:31 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,576
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
How dare they merger operations during a merger! I expect them to put the right airframe on the right route to make money. Forget the UAL pilots vs CAL pilots crap. It's all the new UAL pilots vs. management. Don't get offensive about "my base" or "my plane", it's all of ours now. There will be a lot of changes in the next few years. Some of it will hurt. Don't blame me, I didn't want to merge. 
05-23-2011 | 08:03 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,130
Likes: 0
From: B737 CAPT IAH
Because both MEC's negotiated a transition agreement that expires (for many of the protections) in Dec. 2011. That is what's amazing to me, after a decade of misery, the MEC believed that we'd have a contract last Oct. and agreed to TA protections that only lasted for 18 months.
To be clear, ALPA did this. The company will get all the synergy they need, just none of the goodwill from labor. DDSS.
To be clear, ALPA did this. The company will get all the synergy they need, just none of the goodwill from labor. DDSS.
You summed it up pretty well. When I read the TPA, I really couldn't believe it. And the only thing that could explain the disparity in protections was a belief in the Oct timeline. UFB.
Frats,
Lee
05-23-2011 | 08:19 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,130
Likes: 0
From: B737 CAPT IAH
As much as I don't like the TA, it should be noted that some parts of the agreement remain should an "Airline Party" exercise Partial Termination. The value of any remaining protection is certainly up for debate. As I mentioned earlier, the company will get the operational synergy they need at the expense of labor...again.
I believe I stated a very similar statement on the topic although not specifically related to the TPA. More or less said that mgmt would do everything else that they could to gain synergy and live with the separate ops if need be. In other words....what leverage?
As to the TPA "airline party" wording, most of the folks had no idea ALPA isn't invited to the "party." That is a unilateral power by the now combined mgmt when they come to that expiration date. Most guys I chat with thought ALPA was in that "joint" concurrence requirement.
[Moderator delete]
Frats,
Lee
Last edited by TonyWilliams; 10-06-2011 at 03:11 AM.
05-24-2011 | 05:10 AM
#14
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,559
Likes: 0
From: A Nobody
"Don't get offensive about "my base" or "my plane", it's all of ours now."
Then why can't I bid the 737 flying or the HNL flying I was already doing?
This statement is ???? The only way to pressure management at any company is to prevent them from being king and doing anything they want. Without the surfs kings don't get fed.
Then why can't I bid the 737 flying or the HNL flying I was already doing?
This statement is ???? The only way to pressure management at any company is to prevent them from being king and doing anything they want. Without the surfs kings don't get fed.
05-24-2011 | 07:35 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,982
Likes: 0
From: A320 Captain
How dare they merger operations during a merger! I expect them to put the right airframe on the right route to make money. Forget the UAL pilots vs CAL pilots crap. It's all the new UAL pilots vs. management. Don't get offensive about "my base" or "my plane", it's all of ours now. There will be a lot of changes in the next few years. Some of it will hurt. Don't blame me, I didn't want to merge.
Thats easy for you to say....being on the property. Shift all the flying to the CAL side so they can do it under your work rules...that will be great for speeding up any recalls!
Last edited by pilotgolfer; 05-24-2011 at 09:07 AM.
05-24-2011 | 12:33 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Looking at Apollo right now. I see a United flt 311 AND CO flt 135, both 767s operating 5 min apart non stop to HNL starting OCT 29. Like wingtip flts, NOT CODE SHARE (as they both have a UA and CO code share flt associated with them). On Jan 1, Feb 1, and Mar 1....UA 311 leaves DEN at 1145, CO 135 leaves at 1200. Weird. PLUS, on Mar 31 there is UA 383, a 0900 757 AND flt 311/135!! Three daily flights.
Sled
Sled
Last edited by jsled; 05-24-2011 at 01:02 PM.
05-24-2011 | 12:38 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Because both MEC's negotiated a transition agreement that expires (for many of the protections) in Dec. 2011. That is what's amazing to me, after a decade of misery, the MEC believed that we'd have a contract last Oct. and agreed to TA protections that only lasted for 18 months.
To be clear, ALPA did this. The company will get all the synergy they need, just none of the goodwill from labor. DDSS.
To be clear, ALPA did this. The company will get all the synergy they need, just none of the goodwill from labor. DDSS.
Not sure this is accurate. The way I understand it, CAL ALPA had protections built into their existing CBA. UAL ALPA did not. So our MEC had to go beg for similar protections. As I recall, the Company was having none of it. It took MONTHS just to get the pos TA that we got. Certainly better than nothing...which is what we had.
Sled
Last edited by jsled; 05-24-2011 at 01:38 PM.
05-24-2011 | 12:46 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
HSLD,
I believe I stated a very similar statement on the topic although not specifically related to the TPA. More or less said that mgmt would do everything else that they could to gain synergy and live with the separate ops if need be. In other words....what leverage?
As to the TPA "airline party" wording, most of the folks had no idea ALPA isn't invited to the "party." That is a unilateral power by the now combined mgmt when they come to that expiration date. Most guys I chat with thought ALPA was in that "joint" concurrence requirement.
[Moderator delete]
Frats,
Lee
I believe I stated a very similar statement on the topic although not specifically related to the TPA. More or less said that mgmt would do everything else that they could to gain synergy and live with the separate ops if need be. In other words....what leverage?
As to the TPA "airline party" wording, most of the folks had no idea ALPA isn't invited to the "party." That is a unilateral power by the now combined mgmt when they come to that expiration date. Most guys I chat with thought ALPA was in that "joint" concurrence requirement.
[Moderator delete]
Frats,
Lee
"Most guys" may have thought that, but not the ALPA neg. committee. This was not a case of getting bamboozled. It was a case of UAL stiffing us, yet again. CAL ALPA had protections, we did not. After negotiating for some time, the TA is what we got. Would you rather still be negotiating a better TA? or a JCBA?
Sled
Last edited by TonyWilliams; 10-06-2011 at 03:11 AM.
10-05-2011 | 02:48 PM
#19
New Hire
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Line Holder 767
Who is flying what flying is not something to fight each other over. However, being a former Eastern pilot where the CAL management was mostly the same as it is now, IMHO, they are using the same tactics here. EAL flying was shifted over to CAL and eventually totally taken over.
There are some differences here that may make a difference. EAL and CAL were not merged. EAL pilots were trying to get a contract while CAL had come out of bankruptcy and were not represented by a union. Here CAL and UAL are negotiating for a JCBA. Hopefully this will make a difference. The way it looks, management is trying to play the same game here. What we must remember is that once we combine, we will be one airline if that ever happens. Let's not fight with each other and fight for a common goal.
There are some differences here that may make a difference. EAL and CAL were not merged. EAL pilots were trying to get a contract while CAL had come out of bankruptcy and were not represented by a union. Here CAL and UAL are negotiating for a JCBA. Hopefully this will make a difference. The way it looks, management is trying to play the same game here. What we must remember is that once we combine, we will be one airline if that ever happens. Let's not fight with each other and fight for a common goal.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
