Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Capt with Capt; FO with FO=LOL >

Capt with Capt; FO with FO=LOL

Search

Notices

Capt with Capt; FO with FO=LOL

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-17-2013 | 10:31 AM
  #241  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: A330 First Officer
Default

This is going to be interesting. here is what I got as ALPA merger policy now.


The new policy states that the factors that must be considered in constructing a
fair and equitable integrated seniority list, in no particular order and with no particular weight, now include but are not limited to career expectations, longevity, and status and category.

The new merger policy mandates that merger representatives,
mediators, and arbitrators must consider these factors
when constructing a seniority list; however, they are also
free to consider other factors as they deem appropriate.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 10:42 AM
  #242  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: 767 F/O
Default

Originally Posted by El Gwopo
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?
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.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 10:54 AM
  #243  
Lerxst's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
From: B787 CA - SFO
Default

Originally Posted by SOTeric
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.
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.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 10:57 AM
  #244  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
From: Le Bus
Default

Originally Posted by Lerxst
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.
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.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 10:59 AM
  #245  
LAX Pilot's Avatar
Peace Love Understanding
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
From: Airbus
Default

Originally Posted by Pilotbiffster
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.
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.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 11:13 AM
  #246  
Lerxst's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
From: B787 CA - SFO
Default

Originally Posted by SOTeric
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.
I understand, and agree. I'm withholding my personal comments because I'm not that smart, but smart enough to know that all I can do is respect the process, and then accept the outcome.

Cheers, and good luck to us all.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 11:57 AM
  #247  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by vspeed
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.
I am sure the arbitrators will look on APC for your expert testimony on how profitable (zero profit leading into the merger) CAL was so they can disregard your CEOs under oath testimony. Bottom line you were hand to mouth"...you are the one spinning CALs rosey picture! Get a clue!
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 12:16 PM
  #248  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: 767 F/O
Default

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot
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.
And if that's how the arbitrators feel, I don't think I have a problem with that.
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 12:24 PM
  #249  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: 767 F/O
Default

Originally Posted by Lerxst
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.
"So I chose to look at March 20, 2009 because that's the prime indicator of future airline viability, but only at the am departures, because that's what really matters, and only at the city pairs between Texas and New York, because that's what really matters, and only at narrow body flying, because that's what really matters, and narrow bodies are really wide bodies in every way" .. good God, surely we can find a better expert witness than this.

You know what's really scary ? The UAL counsel knows what the CAL counsel is going to assert before they even do, and presents countermanding testimony before they're even on the record with said testimony. Day 1, UAL counsel outlined CAL's entire argument and refuted it before CAL ever said a word. Party on, Wayne .
Reply
Old 04-17-2013 | 12:36 PM
  #250  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: A330 First Officer
Default

Originally Posted by Pilotbiffster
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.
The DOH is not going to matter much. They will stovepipe the lists. Meaning you could change the names on the list to just A's and B's and numbers. In other words they will move the names to the highest position that they could hold if everyone bid the most senior equipment and position they could hold.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Captain Bligh
United
17
05-08-2011 06:22 PM
DLax85
Cargo
35
04-23-2008 09:26 AM
Flying Ninja
Flight Schools and Training
7
11-01-2006 12:14 PM
WatchThis!
Regional
70
03-10-2006 09:27 AM
CRJammin
Cargo
4
09-16-2005 06:18 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices