Airline Pilot Central Forums - DAL/UCAL Comparison Sect. 1-11

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- United (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/)

- - DAL/UCAL Comparison Sect. 1-11 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/71179-dal-ucal-comparison-sect-1-11-a.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by El10 (Post 1294876)

Shiz you have one error in the scope section. Both DAL and UAL have the same amount of flying allowed above 900sm.

From the DAL PWA:

4. At least 85% of all category A and C operations each month will be under 900 statute miles.

The UCAL TA specifies 80% of monthly operations below 900SM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acwild (Post 1294897)

I'll admit that I have more reading to do but so far I'm not seeing the overall "economic value" of the TA exceeding Delta's.

If this leads to a USAir/AmWest deal as a result, so be it. Jmho.

You can't READ this and determine economic value.Your comment is a perfect example of trite drivel with no facts. Respond with facts and how about starting with the fact of who you are relative to the discussion: UAL or CAL, a '99 hire or not, or a total outsider trying to incite the masses to a no vote so management can continue to pay sub-par wages. I am tired of anonymous, vacuous input.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acwild:1294897

If the NMB finds this as an unreasonable request, then I really don't care about what they think. If this leads to a USAir/AmWest deal as a result, so be it. Jmho.

This is pretty scary way of thinking. I guess some pilots haven't learned much from the Airways fiasco. It is absolutely mind blowing that pilots are willing to give up tens of thousands of dollars and years of QOL improvements shooting for the moon or trying to get it their way.

What if this contract actually makes my QOL worse? Should I still vote for it for the money?:rolleyes:

There is no question that this contract has the potential to make reserve pilots lives significantly worse. Just ask the UAL furloughees now on res at CAL.

At any one time there must be 10-15% of the pilots on reserve. That's a lot dudes getting hosed.

What he said! Meaning Sunvox.

Sunvox,

You wrote:

"LOA 25: Most of the 27 L-UAL pilots I asked had no idea what LOA 25 was about. When I explained the issue, most pilots did not sympathize with the '99 hires. An ALPA rep said to me in private that they intend to repeal the impact by resolution after the SLI when the L-UAL councils can out vote the L-CAL councils. (I have zero proof of whether that is true or possible.)"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
So basically the 27 L-UAL pilots you spoke with did not read the entire contract? Also thanks for screwing the "99" hires, which comes out to 1100 pilots who were a "carve out" in this T/A.

It is not INDUSTRY LEADING.

It screws your fellow pilots

YOU WILL BE ON RESERVE, DON'T KID YOURSELF --AND YOU WILL NOT LIKE IT ONE BIT

PBS--THIS WILL BE A NEW PAIN. BELIEVE ME.

Must of you guys are voting on FEAR and not facts. It is very clear you are not listening or reading the T/A.

Most of the L-UAL guys I have talked with have taken a step back and changed the YES to a NO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by horrido27 (Post 1294546)

Shiznit..

JCBA allows for 60 min report for un augmented International Trips! That's a biggies

Cal's contract 02 Already permits a one hour international Check in. See 12-2-b2. The jcba actually increases domestic down line check in from 30 to 45 minutes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CALFO (Post 1295499)

Cal's contract 02 Already permits a one hour international Check in. See 12-2-b2. The jcba actually increases domestic down line check in from 30 to 45 minutes.

Does this mean yall have outstation check ins domestically at 30 minutes prior now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunvox (Post 1294879)

Bottom Line: This contract has vast QWOL improvements for L-CAL.

In your opinion, not mine or those of my IAH reps. This TA is a NO vote for me.