Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   United (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/)
-   -   Pure Entertainment. My SLI SWAG. (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/73720-pure-entertainment-my-sli-swag.html)

thor2j 03-17-2013 09:38 AM


Originally Posted by untied (Post 1373388)
The 767-300 is, by definition, a widebody.

Look at past SLI awards and you'll see that hourly rate does not effect "WB" vs "NB" arguments.

I know Jay POS was really trying to screw us with pay banding, but it won't help your case.

Well which is it. Most junior UAL guys jump up and down with the "merger policy has changed" for longevity. The pay banding will do the same to the 763 status. Hasn't been done like this , ever! Can't have it both ways.

How can your career expectations be better on an airplane that pays no more?? Come on, use your head.

Ottopilot 03-17-2013 09:41 AM

Why is Jay P. to blame for the pay banding that UAL pilots voted for?

untied 03-17-2013 09:49 AM


Originally Posted by thor2j (Post 1373681)
Well which is it. Most junior UAL guys jump up and down with the "merger policy has changed" for longevity. The pay banding will do the same to the 763 status. Hasn't been done like this , ever! Can't have it both ways.

How can your career expectations be better on an airplane that pays no more?? Come on, use your head.

Longevity has been added.

Pay banding has been proven to have NO effect on SLI where the 757/767 are concerned (look at the DAL SLI).

We will have it "both ways".....both points are valid.

untied 03-17-2013 09:52 AM


Originally Posted by Ottopilot (Post 1373684)
Why is Jay P. to blame for the pay banding that UAL pilots voted for?

Because Jay POS threw a tantrum and refused to talk unless pay banding was included.

We were fighting Jay P and management....not a great position to be in.

Saying pilots "voted for" different items in the contract is WEAK. We took the good with the bad to move forward....there's PLENTY that nobody wanted (Scope giveaway, work rule concessions, etc.)

I'm sick of stupid comments like "well, we must have WANTED moveable days off for line holders since we voted for it!"

Ridiculous...

Sonny Crockett 03-17-2013 12:07 PM

I'm a little confused as to why some think "furloughed guys" should just be stapled to the bottom of the list.

I was working at UAL in 2009.....well after hiring stopped at CAL. I have 9 years of seat time at UAL...to think that would be fair to staple me under a 2008 CAL guy....is kind of a stretch don't ya think?

Re-read ALPA merger policy again.

Mitch Rapp05 03-17-2013 12:20 PM


Originally Posted by Sonny Crockett (Post 1373736)
I'm a little confused as to why some think "furloughed guys" should just be stapled to the bottom of the list.

Because you're unemployed...at least no longer employed by United Airlines. Furlough means you don't have a job. I'm a little confused as to why guys not employed (with United) expect to displace people that are employed (with United).

Olecal 03-17-2013 12:31 PM


Originally Posted by Sonny Crockett (Post 1373736)
I'm a little confused as to why some think "furloughed guys" should just be stapled to the bottom of the list.

I was working at UAL in 2009.....well after hiring stopped at CAL. I have 9 years of seat time at UAL...to think that would be fair to staple me under a 2008 CAL guy....is kind of a stretch don't ya think?

Re-read ALPA merger policy again.

Was it you who stated that they did/are not taking recall to l-UAL, because you didn't want to be at the bottom? So you decided to stay at l-CAL... Please tell me where your career or expectations are currently with l-UAL? For the record, I'm not for stapling any l-UAL furloughs to the bottom, but I also would like to look at fair and equitable for everyone. An important way to look at things is to think where you would be right now if the merger never happened...

block plus 03-17-2013 12:33 PM

Everyone talks about career expectations and longevity but fails to mention status and category with regard to furlough pilots. Status = Ca. Fo. Unemployed.. it will be interesting to see what weight is placed on each item that they must look at.

Wrsofked 03-17-2013 01:20 PM


Originally Posted by Sonny Crockett (Post 1373736)
I'm a little confused as to why some think "furloughed guys" should just be stapled to the bottom of the list.

I was working at UAL in 2009.....well after hiring stopped at CAL. I have 9 years of seat time at UAL...to think that would be fair to staple me under a 2008 CAL guy.....

Delta 08 hires went in front of NW 01 hires, not saying it will happen in this case.

Longevity is so relative. 1 year of longevity at CAL was worth 5 (maybe more) at UAL in terms of what it got you in movement and QOL.

Becareful what you ask for...

flybynuts 03-17-2013 06:24 PM


Originally Posted by Sonny Crockett (Post 1373736)
I'm a little confused as to why some think "furloughed guys" should just be stapled to the bottom of the list.

I was working at UAL in 2009.....well after hiring stopped at CAL. I have 9 years of seat time at UAL...to think that would be fair to staple me under a 2008 CAL guy....is kind of a stretch don't ya think?

Re-read ALPA merger policy again.

Sonny,
I get what you are saying but the blurb about not being an active pilot at time of merger is the thinking behind it. Why would a furlough pilot go before an active pilot. Is it tough I know but this is a reality.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:43 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands