The CAL pilot neutral was of the opinion that the furloughed pilots should at least be credited with active time served prior to being furloughed.

He was overruled by the arbitrator and the UAL pilot neutral, both of whom felt that the furloughed pilots did not deserve any longevity credit.

Ironic, isn't it?

Except that policy has been changed to add Longevity as a factor. So I don't think that its going to be ignored.

The question is does longevity mean when you got initially hired, how long you were active, or a mix of the two?

And yes, a furloughed pilot does have a career expectation, all other things being equal. So we will see how they put all that together.

Are you suggesting that as a LUAL pilot I may find myself junior to another LUAL pilot who was hired after me? I am positive that will not happen.

No. That's not going to happen. The CAL merger committee update covered that question in their last update. It was very concise and informative.

No, I was speaking DAL vs NWA. IOW, a NWA pilot who was hired in 1995 ended up senior to a DAL pilot hired in 1991. But a DAL guy hired in 1989 ended up senior to a guy hired at NWA in 1986. Sorry for not clarifying.

Wow. So, If you were hired at UAL in 1999, and twice furloughed, you should be stapled at the bottom? Even if our total active time was 7+ years, we should be below a 2008 hire at CAL with 4 years active? What if we have been on the CAL side for a year or so, that's 8 +years active. You are a genius sir. I am going to ask the arbitrators to put you in the number one spot, as you deserve it. But that's just MY opinion. I could be wrong too.

There will be no one size fits all to the list. They don't have to apply DOH, Relative %, shoe size, number of Super Bowl wins for preferred NFL team, etc to the entire list. They can use all of these metrics for whatever portion of the list is the most appropriate. The only things I can and will say for sure about how the list turns out is I won't be leapfrogging anyone already senior to me at CAL and I don't expect to be worse off in terms of lineholder/reserve than what I am now.

To answer your question, yes it is reasonable. The UAL furloughees have a vesting. They were identified by UAL management to eventually be the senior pilots at UAL through the normal process of age attrition. Absent a merger, no one on earth would be entitled to sit in the UAL pilot seats 20 or 30 years from now. So, if you thought for a moment this entitlement is without value, consider how many pilots would trade their current position for a slot on the UAL furlough list.

Furloughee's have a career expectation in order of seniority, a pilot that is simply unemployed does not and that is the difference between those working and those temporarily unemployed through no fault of their own. These folks have rights to a UAL job unavailable to anyone else.

Consider a world where the lists were not put together, the furloughees, in time, would return, fly a career and retire at a certain seniority, based on their age, notwithstanding other types of attrition. This is quantifiable, without too much effort a career earnings could be calculated, even for someone that is furloughed today. The arb will look at all of this and then decide, but to say furlough status predetermines a particular outcome would be ill advised.

Don't let the fact that UAL furloughees have a seniority number on the current list, are defined as a status category by union policy, and have 10 year recall rights get in your way. Just like Joe pilot at Express, right :rolleyes:

So would a person who took a voluntary furlough have no career expectations since they left on their own?, maybe for hopes of something better. Should the forced furlough guys go ahead of them? Just a question..... Max