Originally Posted by tkhayes90

Something a lot may have forgotten (or not know) is that just under 200 of the 1437 were voluntary furloughs. Some of these are '78 / '79 hires with seniority numbers below 100. I am also a vol furloughee, with 8 years seniority, plus my time on the street. All the vols had their reasons for taking the furlough out of sequence, mine was to complete my military time so I could retire and not have to continue in the reserves. As we come back, how should we get placed in the ISL? I am thinking that the 767 Capts think they have pretty high career expectations eventhough they were on the street as vol furloughees. In fact, I think all the furloughees had pretty high expectations until UAL right sized to make this merger happen. I know the panel will have the final say, so hopefully I, and the other vols, didn't shoot ourselves in the foot.

Originally Posted by LeeMat

I suspect that the Voluntary furloughs (208) will be the first to become active at the first opportunity...There are rumors of a September recall to the S-UAL side. Anyone that senior who will bypass and gamble is not thinking straight.

Originally Posted by Coto Pilot

A pilots position relative to the one senior to him and the one junior to him will not change in the SLI.

Originally Posted by bkaz

So, how's it going to work wrt the senior furloughees seat/fleet assignments when returning to UAL? When I was recalled last timed, I was awarded a seat based on the unfilled vacancies at the time, not the seat I was furloughed from.

Will the VF's end up as JFK or IAD 320 FO's until the next vacancy bid? If so, wouldn't they be paid as an F/O rather than higher hourly rate they are being pahid now. If that is the case, I would think they might stay where they are until able to bid back into their previous position.

Was there a provision for them to be recalled into their previous position?

Originally Posted by LeeMat

I believe it will be no different than returning from a long term LOA, VF will return to their last position.

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking

I not an expert on the policy but I do know that the policy simply states that the above three items need to be considered in the final ruling in no particular order and with no particular weight. Other factors can be considered and givin greater weight.

Everyone assumes that because this policy cme out after DAL/NWA that it means thre were problems associated other that SLI tht needed to be addressed. I think that the reality is that the DAL/NWA integration was considered a success and this new model reflects that.

With regard to longevity, it swings both way. While the bottom U pilots beat the C pilots if longevity is heavily weighted, the opposite is true at the top of the list. I don't believe that longevity is defined in the policy. I see longevity as more of an airline's longevity not an individual pilot's. For example, if JetBlue were to merge with AA, there would huge longevity discrepancy.

Hopefully we will get a contract soon and have a clearer picture of how the policy pays out.

In the meantime, chill out and try to enjoy the ride.

Originally Posted by CALFO

Enjoy the ride? At least I don't have to spin ALPA merger policy to feel warm and fuzzy. Here's to the arbitrators.

Originally Posted by bkaz

In that case, I'm sure they will return at the first opportunity. UAL won't be able to fill the vacancies at the bottom of the list by recalling these pilots. I wonder how they will deal with it? Hopefully not a surplus of active pilots.