Search
Notices

SLI work begins

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-21-2012, 12:30 PM
  #71  
Peace Love Understanding
 
LAX Pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Default

Originally Posted by ChrisJT6 View Post
But we have plenty of WB Capts that were furloughed at least once and ended up having a pretty good career to compare.
Actually, all the 79 and before hires who are still flying were ALL furloughed, and they are ALL widebody captains now. But of course, they were young enough when they came back to last this long.

So they clearly had a career expectation and our furloughees will not be stapled, especially since they ALL have longevity which HAS to be considered.
LAX Pilot is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 12:35 PM
  #72  
Peace Love Understanding
 
LAX Pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Default

Originally Posted by LCAL dude View Post
For all we know, a furloughee might never have returned to UAL.
Arbitrators won't care. They all have Longevity. That will be considered. They will also look at where they would end up "Ceteris Paribus" which means that no growth nor reduction happened and the furloughees were brought back as predicted retirements happen.

Some will hold WB Capt, some not, but that will be looked at along with their LONGEVITY because thats part of merger policy.
LAX Pilot is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 12:36 PM
  #73  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: B777 CA - SFO
Posts: 728
Default

From Fri 12/21 CAL MEC Blastmail

...The Merger Committee has been working for some time preparing to ensure that the Seniority List Integration process provides a fair and equitable result for our pilots. With the completion of the TA in November, they now have started on a time line that will lead to an integrated seniority list in a timely fashion. This time line was established by protocols agreed to by the two MECs back in May 2010. A big step was taken this week by reaching agreement on the arbitrators who will, absent agreement by the parties, hear the case and decide the result. The three-person arbitration panel will consist of Dana Eischen, Roger Kaplan and Dennis Nolan. All are well respected, prominent arbitrators.
Lerxst is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 12:49 PM
  #74  
Peace Love Understanding
 
LAX Pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Default

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05 View Post
"Absent" was referring to the post above my post. Merger or no merger a furloughed pilot is not an employee of United. It doesn't matter why they lost their job, the only FACT that's assured is that they did lose their jobs. My point is an UNEMPLOYED (w/United) pilot cannot reasonably expect to displace an employed pilot based on what they "think" would have or should have happened. I "would" have been a Captain by now but "x,y, and z" happened. We deal in facts and reality. Reality IS furloughed pilots are NOT employed (with United).
So what about a guy who is ACTIVELY FLYING on the CAL side and has 7 years LONGEVITY total? Should a 3 year pilot that was never furloughed go ahead of that pilot on the integrated list?

And if that pilot gets his 7 years of longevity restored (maybe not all 13 or whatever he would have had) then all the pilots who were previously senior to him will still be.

So its not like there is a huge group of pilots who aren't flying, many of them are flying, and they are also being paid at their previous pay, so that is going to get looked at as well.

Also the reason that pilot might be senior to the 3 year pilot is because of union merger POLICY. Its ACTUALLY WRITTEN! Its says "longevity" is a consideration. So they certainly HAVE TO make an effort to include it.

Also merger policy doesn't care if you are an employee. Its about merging pilot lists. Throughout the merger policy that's what it talks about.

So those pilots are on the list, and they are being merged....

I imagine if you were that pilot, you would have a different opinion....
LAX Pilot is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 12:54 PM
  #75  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: B777 CA - SFO
Posts: 728
Default

A UAL pilot flying on the CAL side will still be considered furloughed for SLI purposes per the TPA; his time spent at CAL will not be added to his previous longevity until after the Order and Award.
Lerxst is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 01:21 PM
  #76  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 218
Default

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot View Post
So what about a guy who is ACTIVELY FLYING on the CAL side and has 7 years LONGEVITY total? Should a 3 year pilot that was never furloughed go ahead of that pilot on the integrated list?

And if that pilot gets his 7 years of longevity restored (maybe not all 13 or whatever he would have had) then all the pilots who were previously senior to him will still be.

So its not like there is a huge group of pilots who aren't flying, many of them are flying, and they are also being paid at their previous pay, so that is going to get looked at as well.

Also the reason that pilot might be senior to the 3 year pilot is because of union merger POLICY. Its ACTUALLY WRITTEN! Its says "longevity" is a consideration. So they certainly HAVE TO make an effort to include it.

Also merger policy doesn't care if you are an employee. Its about merging pilot lists. Throughout the merger policy that's what it talks about.

So those pilots are on the list, and they are being merged....

I imagine if you were that pilot, you would have a different opinion....
FACT: Current l-UAL pilots flying for l-CAL are NOT accruing longevity for l-UAL. They are akin to a new hire off the street for L-CAL(except of course, their pay).

So, YES a 3 year pilot flying for CAL should certainly go ahead of the pilot stated in your example because he/she is STILL furloughed! AGAIN, expecting a pilot currently NOT employed with UNITED to displace a CURRENTLY employed pilot is not only unreasonable it is a windfall for the furloughed pilot. Though merger policy includes longevity as a CONSIDERATION it is more forcefully against any pilot gaining a windfall.


I imagine if you were an FO that was expected to upgrade at 3-5 years (or less), flying for a company that was hiring for both growth and retirements, and financially healthy compared to a dying UAL then you would have a different opinion as well...

Though nothing we discuss on this board can affect the actual SLI, we can certainly discuss realistic expectations. I believe that the root cause of years and years of litigation and an angry pilot group is unrealistic expectations. To even suggest that an (in-voluntarily) furloughed UAL pilot should displace one CAL pilot (that was never furloughed) is unrealistic.
Mitch Rapp05 is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 01:40 PM
  #77  
Peace Love Understanding
 
LAX Pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Default

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05 View Post
I imagine if you were an FO that was expected to upgrade at 3-5 years (or less), flying for a company that was hiring for both growth and retirements, and financially healthy compared to a dying UAL

I didn't realize you were a Southwest Pilot.....
LAX Pilot is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 01:45 PM
  #78  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05 View Post
"Absent" was referring to the post above my post. Merger or no merger a furloughed pilot is not an employee of United. It doesn't matter why they lost their job, the only FACT that's assured is that they did lose their jobs. My point is an UNEMPLOYED (w/United) pilot cannot reasonably expect to displace an employed pilot based on what they "think" would have or should have happened. I "would" have been a Captain by now but "x,y, and z" happened. We deal in facts and reality. Reality IS furloughed pilots are NOT employed (with United).
Regardless, your post was hypocritical. My opinion(which is worth whatever) is UAL/CAL pilots will see an ISL very similar to the DAL/NWA list. It will be a panel of 3 arbitrators(mutually picked) and they'll end up with a relative seniority list. You'll be around the same % on the combined list as you were on your respective single seniority list.
johnso29 is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 02:04 PM
  #79  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 218
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29 View Post
You'll be around the same % on the combined list as you were on your respective single seniority list.
Taken in context, my post was not hypocritical. I agree with your above statement. That has been my point all along!

A pilot on the CAL list that is currently 99% and one on the UAL list currently at 99% should remain around the same percent. Furloughed pilots (of which are at 100.1 +%) expecting to leapfrog pilots currently at 100% or less is unreasonable and quite frankly appalling.

Regardless, good luck and hopefully we'll all be satisfied with the result.
Mitch Rapp05 is offline  
Old 12-21-2012, 02:08 PM
  #80  
Peace Love Understanding
 
LAX Pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Default

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05 View Post
Taken in context my post was not hypocritical. Regardless, I agree with your above statement. That has been my point all along!

A pilot on the CAL list that is currently 99% and one on the UAL list currently at 99% should remain around the same percent. Furloughed pilots (of which are at 100.1 +%) expecting to leapfrog pilots currently at 100% or less is unreasonable and quite frankly appalling.

Regardless, good luck and hopefully we'll all be satisfied with the result.
Except that's not what ALPA merger policy says.....

And the 99% active UAL pilot has 13 years of Longevity, so he certainly won't end up 99% on the overall list.
LAX Pilot is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
2StgTurbine
Regional
37
12-22-2012 05:42 PM
deltabound
Foreign
18
03-28-2010 02:49 PM
bryced1
Flight Schools and Training
26
10-14-2009 04:14 AM
Busboy
Cargo
110
09-18-2007 05:41 PM
ToiletDuck
Hangar Talk
10
02-27-2007 10:35 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices