When your own MEC Chairman unequivocally states "This provision will not affect the SLI process" in his Nov 14 letter specifically addressing LOA 25, I wouldn't place much creedence in conspiracy theories.

 

I'm glad I amuse you. That is exactly how it "came down" with pay banding to the shock and surprise of my council reps. In front of a room of witnesses!! Not exact wording, but close.

Sled

 

Believe me, you don't have the gavel.

 

You guys have had it for the past 2 summers. You just didn't use it. We have. It resulted in Contract 2000. Of course, the other time it resulted in an Injunction

Sled

 

Great. Hope not, but it is obvious the why and who. Our MEC passed exactly who was demanding this steaming pile. Why, a weak attempt to manipulate the SLI period. And it will be revealed during the SLI process.

 

So far I am unsurprisingly unimpressed esp since DAL boys just got their raise. Although the energy food availability kicks @ss!

 

And I walked uphill to and from school when I was a kid.

2000 was a long time ago in pilot years.

And I'm not sure we ever had it unless you go back to pre-1983. We have certainly never used it.

 

You guys should have pulled out the "hat-switch" like us on the lUAL side. We sure showed them whose boss with that one. They didn't dare mess with us after that one.

 

Agree 100%

 

1) That isn't an apples-to-apples comparison. You wouldn't say the same if you were merging with Skywest (yes I know that's and extreme example)

2) Because that isn't ALPA merger policy. The lowest active pilot has almost 14 years of service. He also is still likely to be able to hold wide body CAP, which WONT happen if all the CAL pilots who are younger than him hired in the last 10 years are placed ahead of him.

So the only way to "fix" this is to make sure that he is senior according to his longevity (Notice I didn't say DOH I just said that the policy that will be used considers that.

Also, the list is skewed because of the parking of the 737's right before the merger. (Arbitrator may or may not care)

I and every other pilot totally understand the complexities of the differences of the fleets and situations, but you can't just pick one data point like someone's relative seniority or how many years the junior Capt is (NEITHER or which are in ALPA merger policy).

Guess what, the bottom pilot will be "toward the bottom" but whether that's 99%, 90%, 80% is going to depend on how the arbitrator sees it.

What if the bottom 20% of CAL pilots all end up as widebody capts and also have 25 year careers as captains still, even though they are at the bottom of the list? That's entirely possible because at UAL we are all old, most of us close to needing a cane or wheelchair to get to the gate, so we will all be gone very quickly (some not as quick as others). Plus since only 7 of us are under 40 and I know there are many on the CAL side under 40, and that has to be considered.