Future Vacancy Bids
#101
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.
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.
I agree completely, it's hard to get these points across.
#102
Banned
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 244
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.
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.
Yes not apples to apples. A dinosaur airline that had no real airplane orders, most planes made around wwII (along with the FA), cooked the books for the merger, and was on the verge of a big fire sale. Not apples to apples.
#103
Please, please please read the Delta award. In my opinion, that will be used as somewhat of a template for the UCH award with the exception of the recent addition of longevity as a consideration that didn't exist in ALPA policy at the time of the Delta list. Longevity was clearly added to avoid a Usair Nic #2 result. Just covering their butts if you ask me. If you read the Delta award closely, you'll quickly realize that the bottom number in any seat/fleet/domicile really doesn't come into play (with the exception of no bump flush) as those super junior positions likely indicate a less desirable lifestyle (super junior, crappy life on reserve, blah, blah, blah.)
In fact, it came out more as a category(wide cap, narrow cap, etc), seat, and the number of jobs those entailed with some pullouts and reinsertions based on a number of factors. It did not matter what seat you actually bid, as they're simply slots where the legacy list pilots get slotted back into based on whatever the final list comes out for each category. You will not move on your legacy list relative to the other pilots on the list. Clearly, adding longevity into the equation changes the Delta award solution somewhat, but what the junior position is as a percentage of the list has historically not mattered in the final award. What matters is total jobs, based on category and seat.
FWIW, from a young mid-seniority L-UAL guy (3603 of ?) that has 26 years to go.
Scott
In fact, it came out more as a category(wide cap, narrow cap, etc), seat, and the number of jobs those entailed with some pullouts and reinsertions based on a number of factors. It did not matter what seat you actually bid, as they're simply slots where the legacy list pilots get slotted back into based on whatever the final list comes out for each category. You will not move on your legacy list relative to the other pilots on the list. Clearly, adding longevity into the equation changes the Delta award solution somewhat, but what the junior position is as a percentage of the list has historically not mattered in the final award. What matters is total jobs, based on category and seat.
FWIW, from a young mid-seniority L-UAL guy (3603 of ?) that has 26 years to go.
Scott
Scott, I hope you understand that when I disagree with you, it's not to disrespect you. I know your reputation and consider you to be one of the best, hope to fly with you some day.
What I was trying to illustrate (and argue against) was the theory that junior pilots are holding lCal Captain out of place because more senior pilots are staying FO. I'll bet that if you ignore DOH and go by overall seniority percentage, the same argument could be made for lUal pilots, and the airlines would compare closely. Neither airline has an "up or out" mandatory Captain upgrade, so it would be interesting to compare the junior lCal Captain in each fleet vs the same lUal Captain/fleet.
Upon further review I think Captain at lUal will go higher because of the lower FO hourly rates in the previous contract. But I still think they'll be within 5% overall system senority.
Last edited by LCAL dude; 01-29-2013 at 05:31 PM.
#104
Here's the future result of a hat trick:
Minion: O Mighty Smisek, the pilots are not wearing hats.
Smisek: What's the on-time percentage?
Minion: 98%.
Smisek: Who cares? Lick my boot!! Lick it!
Later...
Minion: O Great and Powerful Smisek, the pilots are now delaying flights.
Smisek: Call Judge Bends-at-the-Waist and get a restraining order against all of them. Put out a Pravda bulletin to the employees that the greedy, overpaid, whiny pilots are going to cost everyone their $100 on-time checks. Tell Wall Street that the airline is failing to make a profit not because of my inept... I mean... enlightened management, but because the greedy, overpaid, whiny pilots want to steal every penny from the company. And cancel Christmas!!!!!
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Once again dreaming about 1 factor with no predetermined weight and banking and barking all about it. No way in h$ll they're ever going to go by straight longevity. Somebody 98%, dont care how long hes been her , is going ahead of somebody 60%. Please be realistic.
Yes not apples to apples. A dinosaur airline that had no real airplane orders, most planes made around wwII (along with the FA), cooked the books for the merger, and was on the verge of a big fire sale. Not apples to apples.
Yes not apples to apples. A dinosaur airline that had no real airplane orders, most planes made around wwII (along with the FA), cooked the books for the merger, and was on the verge of a big fire sale. Not apples to apples.
Pretty nice how the dreamy Real Airplane 787 is benched right as the arbitrators get cracking...Karma for all the ridiculous manipulating is coming! Never heard age of airplanes or FAs help in an SLI.
#106
So, if we call it all off right now and Jeff merges you with Express Jet will you spray the same pure relative seniority solution?
Pretty nice how the dreamy Real Airplane 787 is benched right as the arbitrators get cracking...Karma for all the ridiculous manipulating is coming! Never heard age of airplanes or FAs help in an SLI.
Pretty nice how the dreamy Real Airplane 787 is benched right as the arbitrators get cracking...Karma for all the ridiculous manipulating is coming! Never heard age of airplanes or FAs help in an SLI.
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Oh yeah, those old dinosaur 756s might just have enough cycles left to stick around long enough to cover for the Sparky issues.
#108
Seriously? Well someone at the CAL MEC though it enough to count the 25 A-350 and 25 787 orders as UAL aircraft.
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 230
You speak up about the bone railroad job in LOA25 that was demanded by ur MEC and then you can talk to me about hypocrisy. I am confident Sparky will come around but might not be the climax of gloating over airplane orders at this particular important juncture. Insensitive yes, but I know at least 1436 see it my way on this one.
Oh yeah, those old dinosaur 756s might just have enough cycles left to stick around long enough to cover for the Sparky issues.
Oh yeah, those old dinosaur 756s might just have enough cycles left to stick around long enough to cover for the Sparky issues.
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Bone Job? Yeah right...Maybe he was protecting the major portion of the guys he represents,not just the temporary guests here who would be running back to their old mothership (UAL)once the recall gates were open....I bet if was the other way around The so called bone job you state would have been elevated to a higher level. The guy was nice enough to do what right to get you here, and look at what it's become... Your bone job...... only your opinion.... Your welcome....
Pay banding planes with 200 seat delta, LOA25, dragging negotiations on to facilitate more screwed lists all while you've been feeding our WB fleet for 3 years..now you name one item that UAL MEC demanded inclusion in the JCBA as a manipulation of the SLI. Well shall see how the arbitrators react to an obvious manipulation of the SLI process "protection" that was agree prior should have had no place in the JCBA. Despite both MECs saying LOA25 wont impact SLI it is an obvious attempt to do just so. I will show my level of thanks when I vote them out later this Summer.
Glad on my planet their are some pretty good attorneys that disagree with you.
Last edited by ChrisJT6; 01-30-2013 at 05:08 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post