CAL proposed SLI posted on UAL ALPA site
04-21-2013, 05:08 AM
#122
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,575
Originally Posted by Sunvox
To Mr Sed or any other visiting CAL pilots,
I was wondering if you could help me understand something about the CAL side. Seems a lot of 756 FOs earned $90,761 and a lot of 73 FOs earned $72,520. Does that look right and does that mean ALL those dudes never broke guarantee?
Thank-you from your future stick partner who is not emotionally distressed, but interested in understanding the cultural differences.
I was wondering if you could help me understand something about the CAL side. Seems a lot of 756 FOs earned $90,761 and a lot of 73 FOs earned $72,520. Does that look right and does that mean ALL those dudes never broke guarantee?
Thank-you from your future stick partner who is not emotionally distressed, but interested in understanding the cultural differences.
04-21-2013, 05:12 AM
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
The CAL merger committee has determined that two kicks to Big Jim and the Twins is fair and equitable according to the revised alpa merger policy. The first kick serves as a numbing effect and therefore unlimited knocks to the young lads will not be received as a windfall.
This list just keeps getting 'stupider and stupider'....
04-21-2013, 05:14 AM
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Originally Posted by Sunvox
Hello McFly anyone out there . . .
There are hundreds LWB (or whatever that category was) FOs that earned exactly $90,761. Can no one from CAL explain why this is. Same holds true for NB FOs with earnings of $72,520. Is this a holdback of data or does this represent some structural element of CAL bids and earnings related to min guarantee?
Anyone?
There are hundreds LWB (or whatever that category was) FOs that earned exactly $90,761. Can no one from CAL explain why this is. Same holds true for NB FOs with earnings of $72,520. Is this a holdback of data or does this represent some structural element of CAL bids and earnings related to min guarantee?
Anyone?
04-21-2013, 05:17 AM
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Originally Posted by Slammer
Not the case at all, not embarrassed by our proposed list. I agree with it. Don't think furloughed guys and gals, should go ahead of active pilots etc....I think the UA proposal is very extreme, but they are only looking out for UA pilots only, not me or other CAL pilots, and I fully expect them next month to do their job on their YOUR behalf to push you ahead of us with as much facts and support as possible. i Fully expect the CAL Merger Committee and Katz to do their job and provide the strongest rebuttal to UAs ISL position.
Just think any going back and forth with folks on this forum, about a proceeding totally out of our hand, is fruitless although is its comical to read some of the post.
I've not talked nor flown with anyone, that is embarrassed by the CAL position.
Just think any going back and forth with folks on this forum, about a proceeding totally out of our hand, is fruitless although is its comical to read some of the post.
I've not talked nor flown with anyone, that is embarrassed by the CAL position.
04-21-2013, 05:18 AM
#126
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 787 Captain
Posts: 1,512
Originally Posted by Sunvox
Hello McFly anyone out there . . .
There are hundreds LWB (or whatever that category was) FOs that earned exactly $90,761. Can no one from CAL explain why this is. Same holds true for NB FOs with earnings of $72,520. Is this a holdback of data or does this represent some structural element of CAL bids and earnings related to min guarantee?
Anyone?
There are hundreds LWB (or whatever that category was) FOs that earned exactly $90,761. Can no one from CAL explain why this is. Same holds true for NB FOs with earnings of $72,520. Is this a holdback of data or does this represent some structural element of CAL bids and earnings related to min guarantee?
Anyone?
I thought the category was VSGNWB (Very Small Gauge Narrow Wide Body)
04-21-2013, 05:18 AM
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by Zoomie
Interesting gripe session, however as a CAL guy, I've heard absolutely 0 mention from any UAL pilot comparing their current seniority percentage on the UAL list to the CAL merger committees list.
How about some perspective with regards to relative seniority?
Just curious how the UAL guys are positioned in this list in seniority percentage by comparison...
How about some perspective with regards to relative seniority?
Just curious how the UAL guys are positioned in this list in seniority percentage by comparison...
Ok . . . just for fun.
I went from 56.0% to 62.6% but number but the top L-UAL staplee went from 62.5% to 78.4%
04-21-2013, 05:20 AM
#129
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05
Lol! Yes, lots of us watching and amazed at the attitudes of supposed "mature professionals" on this board.
04-21-2013, 05:28 AM
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 152
Embarrassed? No not at all. Quite the opposite
Our merger committee is doing their job. If they had proposed a furloughed pilot going ahead of me (2005 hire), well then I would of been embarrassed.
I am at 66 percent on the list, excellent seniority at all our bases, twice been able to hold captain on the 737.
Where are your 1998 hires on your list? Reserve? Where would an involuntary furlough pilot be if recalled tomorrow? On reserve?
How long until the last involuntary pilot is recalled?
I remember talking to a friend about taking the CAL job. I mentioned I would be a 50% on the list in 10 years and would retire as a 777 captain. That's why I went to CAL, I knew many retirements were coming and movement here would be excellent. If there was any hint that this movement was dependent on a merger, especially with United, I would of never have taken the job!!
Several UAL folks seem so confident about their equities. I know I am not! Until the final list is produced, I will not count on anything.
... glad this is going to arbitration.
Fair and equitable is that even possible? I believe we are all going to get screwed, just some more than others.
Our merger committee is doing their job. If they had proposed a furloughed pilot going ahead of me (2005 hire), well then I would of been embarrassed.
I am at 66 percent on the list, excellent seniority at all our bases, twice been able to hold captain on the 737.
Where are your 1998 hires on your list? Reserve? Where would an involuntary furlough pilot be if recalled tomorrow? On reserve?
How long until the last involuntary pilot is recalled?
I remember talking to a friend about taking the CAL job. I mentioned I would be a 50% on the list in 10 years and would retire as a 777 captain. That's why I went to CAL, I knew many retirements were coming and movement here would be excellent. If there was any hint that this movement was dependent on a merger, especially with United, I would of never have taken the job!!
Several UAL folks seem so confident about their equities. I know I am not! Until the final list is produced, I will not count on anything.
... glad this is going to arbitration.
Fair and equitable is that even possible? I believe we are all going to get screwed, just some more than others.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
