CAL proposed SLI posted on UAL ALPA site
04-21-2013, 05:30 AM
#131
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
So Slammer,
Think this through for a second. Lets say you were hired by the blue team in 1999. On the Hail Mary list you are going to be placed behind a guy hired in 2011 by the black team. Do you think this is an equitable position? Of course its not. How did those 12 years of active service disappear?
You and 1300 guys from the blue team are behind a guy with less than two years? Its beyond absurd. And I am not talking about a Captain, he's an FO.
Clearly, the long drawn out squabble (think pay-banding and JPOS tripartite contract discussions) for the last three years was ALL about ISL. We ALL lost a tremendous amount of money thanks to this crap. Probably easily north of 100K per pilot over the life of this contract alone. Thank you for that. The fact that JHEP caved on PB still makes me ill.
If I were one of the arbitrators, I'd probably think your negotiators were shooting for the moon with a slingshot. I wouldn't take them or their position seriously. And if I were a CAL dude, I'd be upset with my nego team for that.
Beers.
Think this through for a second. Lets say you were hired by the blue team in 1999. On the Hail Mary list you are going to be placed behind a guy hired in 2011 by the black team. Do you think this is an equitable position? Of course its not. How did those 12 years of active service disappear?
You and 1300 guys from the blue team are behind a guy with less than two years? Its beyond absurd. And I am not talking about a Captain, he's an FO.
Clearly, the long drawn out squabble (think pay-banding and JPOS tripartite contract discussions) for the last three years was ALL about ISL. We ALL lost a tremendous amount of money thanks to this crap. Probably easily north of 100K per pilot over the life of this contract alone. Thank you for that. The fact that JHEP caved on PB still makes me ill.
If I were one of the arbitrators, I'd probably think your negotiators were shooting for the moon with a slingshot. I wouldn't take them or their position seriously. And if I were a CAL dude, I'd be upset with my nego team for that.
Beers.
04-21-2013, 05:33 AM
#132
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by gettinbumped
It would be interesting if the LUAL proposal were just as extreme to see your reaction. I'm sure it would be just as excitable if past posting is an indicator
I will be asking guys on here if they are embarrassed about it.
04-21-2013, 05:38 AM
#133
Not retiring avatar
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Position: 777 CAP
Posts: 768
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...
I have the relative seniority lists that a CAL pilot made a few years ago. One includes furloghees and one list assumes they are stapled.
(Which is the extreme CAL position I was bracing for, BTW; since relative seniority is not mentioned in ALPA policy)
On the "No Recalls" list I am ~54% and behind pilots hired 3 years after me. When I slide down that list next to my new CAL-list "co-workers", I am at ~74% and mid-2005 hires; 10.5 years behind my longevity date.
I've been able to hold Captain continuously since 2000. (A320,737,727,767)
Any outside observers looking at this? Want to chime in and defend this proposal?
04-21-2013, 05:42 AM
#135
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by oldmako
So Slammer,
Think this through for a second. Lets say you were hired by the blue team in 1999. On the Hail Mary list you are going to be placed behind a guy hired in 2011 by the black team. Do you think this is an equitable position? Of course its not. How did those 12 years of active service disappear?
You and 1300 guys from the blue team are behind a guy with less than two years? Its beyond absurd. And I am not talking about a Captain, he's an FO.
Clearly, the long drawn out squabble (think pay-banding and JPOS tripartite contract discussions) for the last three years was ALL about ISL. We ALL lost a tremendous amount of money thanks to this crap. Probably easily north of 100K per pilot over the life of this contract alone. Thank you for that. The fact that JHEP caved on PB still makes me ill.
If I were one of the arbitrators, I'd probably think your negotiators were shooting for the moon with a slingshot. I wouldn't take them or their position seriously. And if I were a CAL dude, I'd be upset with my nego team for that.
Beers.
Think this through for a second. Lets say you were hired by the blue team in 1999. On the Hail Mary list you are going to be placed behind a guy hired in 2011 by the black team. Do you think this is an equitable position? Of course its not. How did those 12 years of active service disappear?
You and 1300 guys from the blue team are behind a guy with less than two years? Its beyond absurd. And I am not talking about a Captain, he's an FO.
Clearly, the long drawn out squabble (think pay-banding and JPOS tripartite contract discussions) for the last three years was ALL about ISL. We ALL lost a tremendous amount of money thanks to this crap. Probably easily north of 100K per pilot over the life of this contract alone. Thank you for that. The fact that JHEP caved on PB still makes me ill.
If I were one of the arbitrators, I'd probably think your negotiators were shooting for the moon with a slingshot. I wouldn't take them or their position seriously. And if I were a CAL dude, I'd be upset with my nego team for that.
Beers.
I know I asked this question before, I thought the most senior involuntary pilot had 8.5 years of active service.
04-21-2013, 05:47 AM
#137
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Hello McFly anyone out there . . .
There are hundreds of LWB (or whatever that category was for 777,767) 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 for folks not at 12 years yet?
Anyone?
Not looking for anything "nefarious", but one major component of CAL's argument surrounds W2s and if these numbers mean that hundreds of CAL pilots fly below guarantee for a whole year and top out their earnings at $72,500 I simply find that amusing, but so far no one seems interested in answering the question.
There are hundreds of LWB (or whatever that category was for 777,767) 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 for folks not at 12 years yet?
Anyone?
Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
I'm sure nothing nefarious is occurring.
Not looking for anything "nefarious", but one major component of CAL's argument surrounds W2s and if these numbers mean that hundreds of CAL pilots fly below guarantee for a whole year and top out their earnings at $72,500 I simply find that amusing, but so far no one seems interested in answering the question.
04-21-2013, 05:58 AM
#138
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
Routemap,
66%? Why should we care what your relative senility is?
66%? Why should we care what your relative senility is?
Looking at where and what a 2005 hire can hold and how many pilots are below this person is an asset to our list. Just like the longevity issue will be an asset to your list.
that is why I bring up 66 percent relative seniority. I know the merger policy does not mention relative seniority.
04-21-2013, 06:02 AM
#139
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by oldmako
Guys hired in early 99 were furloughed for about 18-22 months give or take a few.
once again glad it's going to arbitration let those people figure it out too complicated for my brain.
04-21-2013, 06:18 AM
#140
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Airplane
Posts: 2,385
Okay, I'll be the target, just to ask a dumb question from someone looking in from the outside.
Why isn't the SLI done strictly on hire date?
I know I'll get flamed for this question, but why the need for videos, hearings, arbiters, multiple lawyers, etc? Why not just take the initial date someone was hired at United and Continental and compute a seniority list from there? For individuals hired on the same day, you rank them by birth date.
There will be displacements, of course, and it sucks, but as long as you keep, the current pay rate for those individuals, you chalk it up to the cost of doing a merger. That's gotta be less expensive than the amount the lawyers are making off of this whole process.
I ask, not to be a troll, but simply because I am ignorant to the process and from the outsider's point of view, it looks like a lot of poison, shenanigans and ill will are going to be what comes out of this process.
Why isn't the SLI done strictly on hire date?
I know I'll get flamed for this question, but why the need for videos, hearings, arbiters, multiple lawyers, etc? Why not just take the initial date someone was hired at United and Continental and compute a seniority list from there? For individuals hired on the same day, you rank them by birth date.
There will be displacements, of course, and it sucks, but as long as you keep, the current pay rate for those individuals, you chalk it up to the cost of doing a merger. That's gotta be less expensive than the amount the lawyers are making off of this whole process.
I ask, not to be a troll, but simply because I am ignorant to the process and from the outsider's point of view, it looks like a lot of poison, shenanigans and ill will are going to be what comes out of this process.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
