Originally Posted by El Gwopo (Post 1392965)

I jumpseated a lot on L-UAL back and forth to work since being hired at CAL (thanks for all the rides BTW!)

These are some things I heard BEFORE merger announcement from United folks:

"So, when is the merger going to happen?"
"We really want a management team like yours that actually wants to run an airline"
"We really hate Tilton and just want him gone"
"I don't blame you if you don't want to merge with us, I wouldn't want to either"
"I think we HAVE to merge cause I don't know if UAL will be around for much longer"

These are some things I hear recently from United folks:

"CAL is just a glorified regional"
"I wish we had Tilton back"
"You guys were about to go out of business"
"Your fleet is a joke"
"Guppy, guppy, guppy, guppy, guppy, guppy, and guppy"

This is what i heard from the CAL folks prior to merger:

"FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE DON'T MERGE WITH UNITED!"

These are things I hear now from CAL folks:

"I TOLD YOU WE SHOULDN'T MERGE WITH UNITED!"

Funny how people change. I'm not saying if the change was good or bad just that we are REALLY stuck with each other. No going back. How does everybody think it will be to work here in say...5 years? :confused:

Originally Posted by SOTeric (Post 1392975)

Freunds cross examination makes for interesting reading. Specifically;

Campbells testimony during the DL/NW arbritration regarding financials. He stated one year prior to the merger was a more appropriate indicator as to what each carrier brings to the table.

Why consider time spent at CAL commuters for longevity purposes on the CAL side?

The viability of the routes and hubs each carrier brings to the merger.

I have a feeling there's a lot of squirming and flop sweat going on.

Originally Posted by Lerxst (Post 1393018)

And here is his reasoning for that:

The reason I focus on 2007 was because it
was in -- I believe it was the spring of 2007 that
both Delta and Northwest had both come out of
bankruptcy.
And I felt that that year, 2007, was an
appropriate and fair period to look forward in terms
of career expectations. And we tend to like to look
down the road five years or so for career
expectations.
In this case, I have examined both
Continental and United over a much longer period of
ten years, and United had come out of bankruptcy in
February of 2006.

Originally Posted by Pilotbiffster (Post 1393004)

5 years, prolly pretty good, assuming the place doesn't burn down after SLI. I really gotta wonder how the Human Factors people think things will function if you put a 5 year captain in the cockpit with a 15 year first officer. That's exactly what the CAL side is proposing, and if that happens, I don't think it'll be pretty.

Originally Posted by SOTeric (Post 1393022)

Ok, thanks for the reasoning.

While we're at it, why not go back to 1992 also?

Bottom line, we both sucked. It's a push.

Originally Posted by vspeed (Post 1392737)

Given the past history, it is easy to see. Fair is the key wording in the merger policy. To put a non active, unemployed pilot at a furloughing airline that is in financial trouble ahead of a working pilot at a profitable airline with longer and more rapid career expectation is not fair...regardless of how many larger airframe's due for replacement it was bringing to the table...you can't put career expectation on the size of the hull and our numbers prove that. That is the bottom line and anyone not looking at this with rose colored biased glasses inside the ual propaganda machine can see this very easily.

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot (Post 1393026)

Its not going to happen. The only reason there are 5 year Captains at CAL is because the pilots senior to them didn't take a Captain bid. If Captain went strict seniority, their junior Captain would be a 1994 hire.

That's why they made that argument of "Captains vs. Captains". Because their list is just more spread out.

Originally Posted by Lerxst (Post 1393018)

And here is his reasoning for that:

The reason I focus on 2007 was because it
was in -- I believe it was the spring of 2007 that
both Delta and Northwest had both come out of
bankruptcy.
And I felt that that year, 2007, was an
appropriate and fair period to look forward in terms
of career expectations. And we tend to like to look
down the road five years or so for career
expectations.
In this case, I have examined both
Continental and United over a much longer period of
ten years, and United had come out of bankruptcy in
February of 2006.

Originally Posted by Pilotbiffster (Post 1393004)

5 years, prolly pretty good, assuming the place doesn't burn down after SLI. I really gotta wonder how the Human Factors people think things will function if you put a 5 year captain in the cockpit with a 15 year first officer. That's exactly what the CAL side is proposing, and if that happens, I don't think it'll be pretty.