I've done some digging and I can't find any ALPA contracts that have longevity pay for those who were on the street. If this is ALPA standard than so be it. I am all for it. But, I would have to ask....what are you willing to trade for it? I honestly don't see it. ALPA traditionally negotiates on behalf of those who they currently represent, those are who are in good standing, and those who currently pay dues.

One might argue, that if ALPA traded for longevity pay for those on the street it might welcome a Duty of Fair Representaiton claim. So, be careful here.

The farther away we are from amendable dates, the harder full retro is to get. It's not impossible, but the more jeffey, skppey, and biff run the airline into the ground the harder it will be to get. Gordon was right...Jeffey is no operations guy. See his book Worst to first on page 103 or so, where he gives his assessment of both Kellner and Smisek.

Smisek might be welcome back at Vincent and Elkins when he's done screwing this up. Likely he might make partner this time around just because of the new suits he got here and his fancy title.

Gordon's working on a new book. Worst to first and back again.

 

I would bet that Jeffey has boys on salary, that are ALPA pin wearing brothers who get paid well to monitor this and other forums.

In the past, when someone has posted I have seen them disciplined by management. They lurk. Guarantee it!

The merger is all about gutting CAL's scope languge. That's it.

Protect it, strenthen it, and build a fortress around it.

For everyone on property; this is the contract of your careers. your retirement, the intrinsic value of money in current pay, and our work rules will take a cumulative effect if we don't hit this out of the park. Load up, stride to the pitcher, and drive it!

 

Ask Dave Zullo. he'll tell you.

My main concern here is that Dave Zullo is friends with Jay Pierce. This needs to be watched. Zullo's got the data. Ask him!

[email protected]

Give him a shout and ya'll can talk polling data and scope. Jeffey has him on speed dial.

 

It really depends on how the crews are used.

My look at most UAL pairings they seem unproductive. I would rather be productve, get in my time and go home and enjoy my time off at home. I don't want to enjoy down-time on a layover in Bozeman Montana.

UAL pairing builders are about 20 years behind where the industry is right now.

 

Why would I ask someone’s opinion who works for management? I realize you are being sarcastic, but I am asking a serious question. To me the items I listed are non-negotiable. Maybe other items should be added to that list or maybe the list I suggested was too long. There are a lot of other things that I want and expect to be in the JCBA. There is difference between wants and needs. I consider the items I listed as needs, not wants. However, I also expect there to be trading on these issues between Management and our union on wants. It is not my intent to back door negotiations in any way. What I am looking for is information on what my fellow non-management pilots and fellow non-full time trip loss union pilots expect minimum items to be included in a JCBA. Make the argument(s) why there should or should not be a minimum so that when a vote comes up, to approve or disapprove a JCBA, just how out of touch the negotiators are we the rest of us.

 

I know.........to you specific items are non negotiable.

To me....specific items are non negotiable.

To Bob, John, Sue, and Pedro specific items are non negotiable.

BUT...Unfortunately everything is negotiable, and everything that has a value is costed out and traded for, either up or down.

The reason you ask Zullo is because he needs to be pimped early and often. he needs to know he is never welcome back on the line.

Non negotiable for me is management pilots (NOT) on the seniority list and control of the seniority list.

 

OK. I'll be your huckleberry. I'll nibble on it.


My JCBA would include:

1. 70 percent retro. (full retro is a pipe dream me thinks. Call it a signing bonus or a 4th of July Bonus, call it "rose bud" for all I care.

2. SCOPE! Iron Clad, everything over 62 seats performed by mainline, except turbo prop equipment, that would be limited to 72. Aer Lingus out of IAD goes bye-bye as well. No more out sourcing international long haul routes either.

3. Perdiem: government rate

4. Laundry service: No thanks, I'll take that money somewhere else, like in COLA allowance for east and west coast.

5. Me too clause: All SNB equipment pays NO LOWER than SWA rates. Include a me too clause that is on auto pilot should SWA raise their rates.

6. Junior man at 200 percent current book, 300 perent for night and holidays. No JM into right seat unless he is a check airman or instructor pilot.

7. Hourly pay rate past 4 hours scheduled block in. As in Fed Ex/UPS. If you are gone, not your fault, not company's fault you still get paid, just like the doctor or an attorney. Time keeps ticking and so does your pay.

8. Retirement: B plan match at 14 percent. C fund???? not sure....Mandatory payment of 40K into all B funds for all active pilots at date of signing.

9. All rates of pay will reflect: SWA SNB plus a dollar. LNB at 120 percent, LWB at 150 percent.

10. New FARs will clean up rest issues. now just need productive work rules to help us earn more.

11. Bidding...Seniority locking via any automated bidding system, other wise hard lines.

 

^^^^^^^^^^ YEP ^^^^^^^^^^^
To a degree, I would have to say I see Otto's point.

Example as recent as this year....There are member's/parts of the Grievence Comm. who have actually said that Zullo is a 'good guy', he's 'worked' with us on Pilot Grievences (Level 2+). I have NOT heard Adams or Kingman say this, but their worker-bees have.

Read into it what you will/call it paranoid (show me a reason NOT to be right now with all going on), but if there is a "pal-pal" relationship between the CAL-MEC Higher-Up (a'la JP) & the likes of Zullo, that $hit needs to cease. This is strictly business, nothing more, and needs to stay that way. Zullo's made his bed with the 'pilot group', and that's were he sleeps......SOLO.....If I had it my way, for the rest of his career at "UAL".

Has Stivalia NOT taught us enough!?!?.....NEVER forget.



Alrighty "Huck", have to disagree.

First of all...Everyone's going to have an oppioion on "% of retro-pay", that I will agree upon. To allow MGT to futher "pick our collective pockets" (along with the Government) by titling "RETRO PAY as a Signing Bonus", NO THANKS. The sum of $$$ attached to "Retro PAY" is just that, PAY. That sum should NOT be taxed as a "Bonus". Stating the obvious, taxes on a "Bonus" vs "Pay" are big, especially with the size of RETRO PAY that most of us expect. This is NOT Profit Sharing, RETRO is the repayment of a loan that is MILES over-due to ALL PILOTS.

End story.....There is a BIG difference in how the "bank-roll" hits our pocket's. I for one refuse to get 'short-changed' by giving the Gov anymore $$$ than I need to, especially on something as simple as to how it's titled within a CBA(J).

 

I like your list. I do have a couple of questions.

Item 6 I really like this. 150% gives the company a break for being understaffed. Do you think 200% would be enough?

Item 7. I am not familar with this. Could you please explain?

 

One thing for sure : You won't get either Jay to go along with this. Is this some kind of company fishing trip?