Say it ain't so - Pierce!
#51
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Posts: 536
It is most likely a term for the number of captain slots each side brings to the combined total and it will be run in straight seniority order. Thus no f.o. who chose QOL over left seat will suffer, but will be placed where he/she would be if they had taken an upgrade at first opportunity ...
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 137
Sounds like you'll need to get used to reading the parking checklist
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
OK the proposal by the CAL Integration folks is what's know as, "Asking for the moon and expecting to get into orbit."
There is an obvious substantial DOH difference between UAL and CAL making a straight DOH not attractive to CAL crews at all. So what do you do? Ask for the moon.
Yes the presentation is stating that only Captains should be considered merging with Captains and FOs with the like. They realize the limitations of the no change in pre-merger order but if the emphasis is placed on Captains it will move well beyond "relative" seniority. The up-side for CAL are many in their presentation and include making a true relative seniority seem like a great deal for all.
Personally I believe that while there isn't chance for this idea to get beyond the initial briefing it will effect the thoughts of the neutrals enough to be a foggy consideration and ultimately benefit the CAL pilots.
Do I like it? NO!
There is an obvious substantial DOH difference between UAL and CAL making a straight DOH not attractive to CAL crews at all. So what do you do? Ask for the moon.
Yes the presentation is stating that only Captains should be considered merging with Captains and FOs with the like. They realize the limitations of the no change in pre-merger order but if the emphasis is placed on Captains it will move well beyond "relative" seniority. The up-side for CAL are many in their presentation and include making a true relative seniority seem like a great deal for all.
Personally I believe that while there isn't chance for this idea to get beyond the initial briefing it will effect the thoughts of the neutrals enough to be a foggy consideration and ultimately benefit the CAL pilots.
Do I like it? NO!
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Posts: 206
Putting staller (small "s" on purpose) on your ignore list!
This board is waaayyy better without her (yes, "her" on purpose).
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 137
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post