Is the SLI already done?
 

Section 6 - Seniority
6-A General
6-A-1 A Pilot shall be placed and shall retain his relative seniority position on the United Pilot
Seniority List (the “Seniority List”) effective on the date of hire as a Pilot with the Company. A
Pilot shall remain on the Seniority List from such date except as provided in this Agreement.



The above is cut and pasted from the new JCBA. Does this mean the SLI is already done? The UAL and CAL sides both voted on it.

Please don't flame me for this, but this is from the contract. I won't argue one way or another how it should be done.

Maybe JP was so busy trying to write LOA 25, he forgot to read the fine print...........

We should do SLI randomly just to make things interesting. Just put all the names is a spreadsheet and hit a button and they get scrambled....

To some like EWRGuppyFO it is already a foregone conclusion. It will be relative seniority and that is it.

LOLZ. Not going to happen... That's not in ALPA merger policy and clearly doesn't work with the aircraft ratios...

So the 85' hires at CAL should just help themselves to the widebody seats at UAL then???? :D

The '85 hires at CAL already hold widebody!

Yeah but now there will be THREE times more wide body positions available!

It may not be ALPA merger policy; however, most recent ALPA mergers have strongly resembled a relative list with a couple of exceptions. If this goes to arbitration, and my guess is it probably will, expect something close to relative. Just my .02

I see it coming out fairly relatively, with junior UAL guys getting a bit of a bump upward due to their longevity of ACTIVE service over the same relative CAL pilots. There will be some other factors that affect the placement by small percentages ie..career expectations. I don't see a windfall in the cards for either group, regardless of what ALPA merger policy is.

Don't get all ****y...its just an opinion.

Easy Beavis. I'm not arguing one way or the other. I already had my say in the one thing I could say on. Didn't go my way. Besides, didn't you already get the pdf file that had the relative seniority already figured out for both airlines? :eek:

Except relative seniority would be a windfall for CAL pilots. UAL has much more widebody aircraft, and fewer narrowbody. CAL is a smaller airline, but has more than twice as many narrowbody, and UAL has three times as many widebody.

My friends at CAL all tell me they would like relative seniority, and I don't blame them. It would be good for them, and bad for me, alas.

And if thats what they do, then thats fine. But you just have to understand that while CAL is a great airline and there are certainly opportunities for earlier relative seniority narrowbody capts, UAL brings the big paying jobs in greater number.

So if the DAL arbitration was used as a model they'd say (pretending it was 3 to 1 widebody) the top XXXX pilots are going to be 3 UAL for 1 CAL and then do the same for mid body, and then the narrowbody (except it would be 2 CAL for 1 UAL mixing in the narrowbody).

That's only if they use that logic.

Doesn't matter either way, because they are certainly to make it confusing enough that we all shrug and say "Ok, that's the list"

Someone just put that together for a comparison. Its not official LOL.

Ok..I'm willing to listen here. Notice I did say UAL pilots getting a bump for their time in active service.

I don't see how ending up somewhere close to your pre merger position relatively is a windfall? You are where you were within a few percentage points adjusted for longevity, active service, and career expectations. How is that a windfall? Your not gaining or losing much.

Our guys relative to the end of the UAL list have been captains for years if they wanted to be. Super senior first's if not.

It's all moot anyway...just throwing it out there.

And that is exactly why arbitrators have essentially handed out relative list recently.

Btw, the widebody/narrowbody percentages had very little if any influence on the DAL/NWA list, it just didn't matter to the arbitrators. The NWA guys did a get a small bump (pull and plug) to makeup for the large number of NWA retirements. I personally was within .1 percent of my pre-merger relative number.

I think that the UCAL list will have some different factors than the Delta list, but anything more than 3-5% difference in relative numbers is unlikely imo. The worst guys at Delta (91' hires) lost about 3% relative I think.

Good luck to all

It isn't because they just wanted to do it relatively. Its because the fleets were more closer relative to each other.

CAL and UAL do not have that similar fleet mix.

UAL had 72 widebodies and 140 narrowbody. So 1 for 2.

CAL had 22 widebody and 240 737's So 1 for 10.

These don't count the 25 WB CAL had on order and the 50 WB UAL had on order, so it could skew the ratios a bit more.

BTW, I read the ENTIRE DAL NWA arbitration decision, and they used the size of the fleets and ratios which is how they came up with the three tranches of seniority. Yes, some people came out very close, because the fleets were similar.

But its simplistic to think they just made it relative for no reason and that they will do that with CAL UAL.

Oh that comparison? You actually believe that is the final solution?

:rolleyes:

It will be soon. UAL Blastmail
 

Arbitration hearings on the SLI have been scheduled to begin in April. All hearings will be open to pilots and their families.

All hearings will take place at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel,1330 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC. This hotel is located just a short walk from L'Enfant Plaza (which is also a hub for the Metro trains). Hearings are scheduled to extend for nine hours each day and will likely begin each day at 9 a.m. and end by 6 p.m. with up to a 90-minute break for lunch. Signage will be posted in the hotel entry and/or lobby to direct members to the hearing room for that day. A schedule of arbitration hearings follows:

April 15-20
May 11-15
June 11-13
June 18-20
June 27-28

Each side will present opening statements on April 15. The Continental Representatives will present their direct case April 15-20. The United Representatives will present their direct case May 11-15. June hearings are scheduled for rebuttal and sur-rebuttal presentations by both parties. One or more of the listed dates may not be used.

In addition, pre-hearing statements will be submitted April 11, 2013 and post-hearing briefs will be submitted July 25, 2013. All statements and briefs will be posted on the Merger Committee’s section of the MEC website once they are available. Links to the content will be provided in regular updates and on the MEC website homepage.

This is soley about maintaining your position on the seniority list from your date of hire til you retire. It has nothing to do with a sli.

Glad yo see they're not slumming it.

Active at a company that was clearly headed downhill.
How many years of service did the Braniff & Pan Am & Eastern guys have ? So a "bump upward" as you put it is in no way fair, in fact its a windfall.

How close to CA were they after 17 years ? The only hope for those guys was to merge with another airline and grab some seniority from the other pilot group.

But I have no final say, and they may get it, in which case they are the luckiest *pilots* in the industry - but they'll still complain :p

(Thats just my opinion)

Sorry in advance for the snark here but:

UAL widebodies paid far less than CAL narrowbodies pre-merger.

So keep yer corroded, poorly equipped and maintained, low paying, run-out widebodies

Not even close. Including the 16% B-fund contribution and not even counting work rules, all aircraft types at UAL paid more than all aircraft types at CAL. 777 rates were exactly $1 less per hour, but with the 16% B-fund, they were way more. Doesn't even count trip rigs, etc.

It doesn't matter now because its in the hands of the arbitrators.

You guys keep quoting the talking points, but no one reading this board is on the arbitration panel and actually looking at the data shows the truth.

I'd be shocked if one United pilot had a lower relative seniority than they currently have, if not much higher, including the pilots on furlough, who are obviously coming back to the property, hence have a great career expectation.

Must be why the L-UAL merger committee fought long and hard to not release w2 numbers...

I'm going with electrified.

But their workrules "paid" way more. With a 200+ credit-hour month for a couple of our 737 pilots, LCAL seems to be learning the value of soft time pretty quickly. I'm just happy to get adequate rest now without having to call in fatigued to get it. Between our pay and their rules it was a wash. Cost per year $187k vs $184k.

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm

Who are coming back to the CAL side, thanks to the merger.
And have a great career expectation as EWR756 FO, VS
junior A320 FO in ORD/SFO

Again, thanks to the merger.

So if you think those pilots deserve anything other than staple to the bottom of the combined list, perhaps they should take their red clips and entitled attitudes back out on furlough, and await recall to the L-UAL side, since its obviously been such a great career for them :rolleyes:

Great career expectations??? YGBSM.

There's a reason why both sCAL and sUAL have unfilled FO vacancies in NYC on the 757/767.

Rolleyes indeed.

Pure effluent.

Very different reasons.

Would you have rather flown a min 16 day off line with layovers in FCO, CDG, any of a dozen German cities ... etc with 87 hours of pay,

or a 12 day off A320 line with 40 something hour layovers in Toronto
for less hourly pay, even at greater longevity ?

I compared schedules with yer 97, 98, 99 hires many times prior to this "merger of equals"

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: indeed !!!

I have now read everything. Thank You! :)

Cheers Brother

I realize you guys are all havin' a rockin' good time arguing over something we can't control, BUT I just thought I would address the OP's actual question:


It appears to me that Mr. Probe (the OP) was looking at the words "shall be placed . . . and shall retain . . . effective on the DOH" and hinting that Jay Pierce had missed the fine print and DOH was a forgone conclusion because the contract specifies exactly that in the opening paragraph.


Ahh, sorry Mr. Probe, but I do believe that would be a mistaken interpretation of the language. 1) The "Seniority List" is what the SLI is building, and 2) the paragraph is talking about new hires. You get added to the list when you get hired, and you keep your relative position until the day you die or until some judge says otherwise based on some future airline nonsense.

Just tryin' to stay focused ;)

*****************************************

Well, perhaps you should talk to your fellow "red clip" brethren
who walk around the IAH schoolhouse with the biggest chip on their
shoulders- one that would get them pulled out and sent packing if they were probationary.

They act like entitled victims, and refuse to return a friendly hello. On the line they talk about "getting their left seat BACK after SLI" - BACK! When was a 99 hire a CA? Where were you when CAL was hiring in 05 ? You could have applied here. Probably too good for CAL is my guess.

We aren't the ones who drove your airline into the dirt, that would be your MGT. Be angry at Glenn and CO.

I used to be pretty neutral, but my attitude changed after steady exposure to this kind of nonsense.
I'm actually a generous and humble guy to fly with, but I absolutely will not be if you bring this to the cockpit with you. Thats all

Cheers

Which, of course, they are not. Why expect them to walk on pins and needles? Or are you one of the folks that constantly needs to be "stroked"?
Um, sure.
Perhaps this was said by a voluntary furloughee who is hanging out at CAL??? (Many of these pilots will absolutely return to their prior CA seats after SLI--unless, of course, they take their recall to UAL first. And the recalls only recently started.)
You are almost certainly correct.

I can't speak for others but of all the potential options in 2005, CAL was not even on my radar. Please don't take offense but 05 CAL first year pay, commuting to EWR (or IAH), and no health insurance???

No thanks.

Started in 2005 at 29 bucks an hour with no health insurance and I commuted to EWR. No regrets here.

Exactly. To each, his/her own.