Say it ain't so - Pierce!

Reply Subscribe

Page 7 of 7

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

04-15-2013, 08:27 AM

#61

LAX Pilot

Peace Love Understanding

Joined APC: Nov 2012

Position: Airbus

Posts: 1,040

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regularguy

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.

Their request is so absurd that it is likely to be completely ignored.

04-16-2013, 02:35 PM

#62

cgull

Banned

Joined APC: Jun 2009

Position: 757/767 FO

Posts: 105

Quote:

Originally Posted by vspeed

You already did when you voted yes! If you want off the 74 bid it, or upgrade at UAL before the SLI. You've had 28 years to do so already...If you couldn't, then whose fault is that...the CAL pilot's?!? More like Tilton and CO.

- and it's not 7000 pilots, there are 1500 or so in both groups who are on various out of sequence positions versus their capable holding seniority for one variable or another, quality of life, commuting etc...A perfect world theoretical solution never happens, people bid out of their seniority all the time

No where does it say in ALPA merger policy Capt for Capt or FO for FO.

"The troubled global capital markets coupled with our high leverage may affect our ability to satisfy our significant financing needs or meet our obligations. As is the case with many of our principal competitors, we have a high proportion of debt compared to our capital. We have a significant amount of fixed obligations, including debt, aircraft leases and financings, leases of airport property and other facilities and pension funding obligations. At December 31, 2008, we had approximately $5.9 billion of long-term debt and capital lease obligations, including $2.4 billion that will come due by the end of 2011."

http://secfilings.nyse.com/filing.ph...C=SECTION_PAGE

My bet is that CAL was approaching the critical moment that all their Bullet Loans were coming due at the end of 2010 (2011, 12, 13) along with the aircraft order that were non-cancelable that had to be paid where CAL did not have the cash to pay for. Couple this 10K info in 08 with the 10K of 2009 and the 1st Quarter 10Q Earnings Call where it was stated that CAL had No Backstop financing or Primary Financing for Any of the Remaining Aircraft of the 84 aircraft order after 2010 and the CAL argument of Capt for Capt goes limp.

Craig