Today's LUAL SLI Presentation?
05-14-2013, 03:32 PM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by Lerxst
Now, on to your further characterizations of the Zeus db. I'm sure the UA side would also have severe issues with anything presented that had a company managing director caveat on it stating:
"This data was taken from now a obsolete database that was maintained at Continental over many years and by many different individuals. By spot-checking certain individuals for whom we know the correct dates, we know that there are errors in the data represented in the attached spreadsheet.
"However, we have no way of knowing how prevalent those errors are or the extent to which the dates may be incorrect.
"As we have stated before, this information has no bearing on the operation of the airline or the employment entitlements of the pilots it represents, and as such has never had cause nor reason to be challenged or verified. These are merely data fields pulled from a long-forgotten database."
The arbitrators noted that they are mindful of this caveat when parsing the information:
ARBITRATOR EISCHEN: The Panel, as I have indicated to you last evening, gentlemen, took under careful consideration the objection -- the objection and the response, which were previously articulated and have just now been expanded.
And on careful reflection, we are going to deny the objection as to admissibility of the document without prejudice to and while continuing to consider in due course the standing objection to the weight to be accorded to the documents or any position concerning their probative value.
Seems fair.
"This data was taken from now a obsolete database that was maintained at Continental over many years and by many different individuals. By spot-checking certain individuals for whom we know the correct dates, we know that there are errors in the data represented in the attached spreadsheet.
"However, we have no way of knowing how prevalent those errors are or the extent to which the dates may be incorrect.
"As we have stated before, this information has no bearing on the operation of the airline or the employment entitlements of the pilots it represents, and as such has never had cause nor reason to be challenged or verified. These are merely data fields pulled from a long-forgotten database."
The arbitrators noted that they are mindful of this caveat when parsing the information:
ARBITRATOR EISCHEN: The Panel, as I have indicated to you last evening, gentlemen, took under careful consideration the objection -- the objection and the response, which were previously articulated and have just now been expanded.
And on careful reflection, we are going to deny the objection as to admissibility of the document without prejudice to and while continuing to consider in due course the standing objection to the weight to be accorded to the documents or any position concerning their probative value.
Seems fair.
05-14-2013, 04:24 PM
#92
Peace Love Understanding
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Originally Posted by boxer6
Please don't assume this is the only data base or source of information. I would believe this to be only one of a few or multiple sources to gleen the information sought. Despite any stated or inferred inaccuracies, the Zeuss data base was a good way to call attention to the discrepancies between DOH vs. Longevity. I'm quite sure more thorough research will or has been done, to the satisfaction of the panel.
Puffing is one thing, but outright misrepresentation in inexcusable.
05-14-2013, 04:46 PM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by horrido27
Funny that some guys are posting snippets of the Transcripts as if they are 100% pure fact and that is going to be what influences the Arbitrators.
Kinda like showing up at the 2nd inning of a Playoff game and after watching 5 mins of the game, declaring a winner and champion.
Funny.
After reading 8 days worth of Transcripts, and many of the exhibits, this thing still has a ways to go, I am comfortable with those representing my concerns and goals.
Motch
Kinda like showing up at the 2nd inning of a Playoff game and after watching 5 mins of the game, declaring a winner and champion.
Funny.
After reading 8 days worth of Transcripts, and many of the exhibits, this thing still has a ways to go, I am comfortable with those representing my concerns and goals.
Motch
Hey, I resemble that comment
Seriously though, I appreciate your being here, but obviously I disagree, and all I can say is we will see in September. I think you are overlooking the most obvious fact in the argument, and that is the mega-carrier argument. I do not believe the board will disagree with the analysis that CAL had no future as a stand alone carrier, and therefore the corollary is that the advancement of which CAL is so enamored is a direct result of the merger and the resulting list falls to UAL advantage in every category. What does that mean . . . stovepiped Category and Class sorted by longevity, and what does THAT mean? Do you lose your job? Do some pilots sit reserve for a couple years? Do you make it to WB captain in 2020 or 2015?
It's not about anyone losing their job. It's about how soon they get to the "primo" position, and who get's there first.
We are all going to benefit from industry rationalization and stand to benefit from a decade at least of growth and retirements. Hopefully we can agree that 2015 will be a better place than where we are today.
05-14-2013, 04:54 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
And, I stand behind my original guess . . . .
Originally Posted by Sunvox
This is what happens when you're stuck in bed with a torn ligament . . .
Based on CALs outrageous proposal I want to change my own SWAG.
So any CAL pilots like to gamble? I'll lay 2:1 odds that based on 7563 UAL pilots and 4589 CAL pilots making a list of 12154 . . . .
I will be between 6200 and 7100. This puts me next to a 02/05/1996 hire and I am a 04/01/1996.
WB-CAP UAL(1557)/CAL(741) list numbers 0 to 2298
NB-CAP UAL(997)/CAL(1220) list numbers 2299 to 4515
WB-FO UAL(2384)/CAL(1250) list numbers 4516 to 8149
NB-FO UAL(2625)/CAL(1378) list numbers 8150 to 12154
if it gets sorted DOH I'm 6281 and if it gets sorted relative seniority I get 7087
Status and category - check
Longevity -check
Career Expectations - we agree to disagree, but a draw at best and has never ever ever been used to override status and category in the first part of the list even in USAir's case where arguably they were on the verge of liquidation, and UAL had profit in the last nine quarters announced before the merger and CAL did not so nah nah my dog's bigger and meaner than your dog.
Based on CALs outrageous proposal I want to change my own SWAG.
So any CAL pilots like to gamble? I'll lay 2:1 odds that based on 7563 UAL pilots and 4589 CAL pilots making a list of 12154 . . . .
I will be between 6200 and 7100. This puts me next to a 02/05/1996 hire and I am a 04/01/1996.
WB-CAP UAL(1557)/CAL(741) list numbers 0 to 2298
NB-CAP UAL(997)/CAL(1220) list numbers 2299 to 4515
WB-FO UAL(2384)/CAL(1250) list numbers 4516 to 8149
NB-FO UAL(2625)/CAL(1378) list numbers 8150 to 12154
if it gets sorted DOH I'm 6281 and if it gets sorted relative seniority I get 7087
Status and category - check
Longevity -check
Career Expectations - we agree to disagree, but a draw at best and has never ever ever been used to override status and category in the first part of the list even in USAir's case where arguably they were on the verge of liquidation, and UAL had profit in the last nine quarters announced before the merger and CAL did not so nah nah my dog's bigger and meaner than your dog.
05-14-2013, 05:03 PM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
And for the record, I am not showing up in the 2nd inning with only a piece of data from the whole. I have been embroiled in this debate from day one and am fully informed of all the facts, but those which I find most compelling are related to the mega-carrier argument.
As for that matter . . .
Can and would any CAL pilot care to argue against the mega-carrier argument.
Here's the argument:
After DAL and NWA merged the industry was thrust upon a course of consolidation for which Mr. Tilton had been preparing for many years, but CAL was resisting, and history has shown that consolidation was inevitable therefore by corollary CAL's stand alone hopes were futile.
So, what's the counter to that argument in detail please? Can anyone from CAL argue why they would have been better off in the "real world" as a stand alone carrier, and how their career expectations were better as a result?
And, finally let's keep in mind that precedent in SLI decisions is very simplistic: Category and Class has always been the starting point so what part of the CAL argument is going to cause the arbitrators to sway from that as a starting point? CAL can not hope to argue WB versus NB, and the argument surrounding longevity seems obviously in UAL's favor as well so the entire argument must surround career expectations or the "infinite considerations" not mentioned in ALPA policy like W2s, number of ETOPS planes, financial statistics, and how fast pilots got to be Captain. Is that really your argument or am I missing some detail?
As for that matter . . .
Can and would any CAL pilot care to argue against the mega-carrier argument.
Here's the argument:
After DAL and NWA merged the industry was thrust upon a course of consolidation for which Mr. Tilton had been preparing for many years, but CAL was resisting, and history has shown that consolidation was inevitable therefore by corollary CAL's stand alone hopes were futile.
So, what's the counter to that argument in detail please? Can anyone from CAL argue why they would have been better off in the "real world" as a stand alone carrier, and how their career expectations were better as a result?
And, finally let's keep in mind that precedent in SLI decisions is very simplistic: Category and Class has always been the starting point so what part of the CAL argument is going to cause the arbitrators to sway from that as a starting point? CAL can not hope to argue WB versus NB, and the argument surrounding longevity seems obviously in UAL's favor as well so the entire argument must surround career expectations or the "infinite considerations" not mentioned in ALPA policy like W2s, number of ETOPS planes, financial statistics, and how fast pilots got to be Captain. Is that really your argument or am I missing some detail?
Last edited by Sunvox; 05-14-2013 at 05:16 PM.
05-14-2013, 06:29 PM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by LAX Pilot
I think its sad that they provided false information knowingly and then try to cover it up just to get a better SLI position.
Puffing is one thing, but outright misrepresentation in inexcusable.
Puffing is one thing, but outright misrepresentation in inexcusable.
05-14-2013, 06:34 PM
#98
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by Maxepr1
Your side did the same, wasn't there numbers twisting, missing guam guys? Katz busted a few of them,,,, Center can I have a vector around LAX'es arrogance..... Open up your eyes LAX... your presentation wasn't all high and mighty ...I'm sure nothing was skewed in any of Uniteds' presentation..... It's a game, don't act shocked and all high and mighty it's pathetic....
05-14-2013, 06:46 PM
#99
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Sunvox..
Look, nothing you say is gonna change my opinion, and nothing I say is gonna change yours.
I do know that in 2006, after I had started amassing TPIC hours.. I had my sights set on Delta and then a few below that. United, was not on my radar. Why?!- Because EVERY United Pilot in my squadron hated it, and told me to stay away. "Only come here if there's no other choice". Also, a handful of them actually moved on from UAL Pilots to Fedex/UPS after their furlough. None came to Continental.
I ended up at CAL and I'm happy to be here. Is it perfect, hell no. But my future was looking pretty good in 2007 looking forward. Yes, I was stagnant for a few years after we furloughed 149 pilots. But reality is, I am a lineholder 756 FO flying International like I wanted to. My airline had new aircraft on order (78's and 73NG's) and we had tight Scope.
One of my friends is a 2000 United Newhire. Twice furloughed. Still out. I feel I had better career potential then he had. He feels differently. Strangely, another friend (we were all in the same squadron) was also hired in 2000. One month later. He had no hopes for UAL.
2 UAL Furloughs, 2 different opinions about their own airline.
End of the day (or end of the summer..) yeah, once this SLI is behind us and after the first year of base/equipment changes.. by 2015 I hope things have settled down and gotten better.
Motch
PS> The 2nd inning comment was thrown out there because while you (but not only you) posted slides from the hearings, you didn't mention the redirect where Katz showed where those slides were missing info. Like the Pension funds paid by the company, like the missing 29 million from Air Mic that wasn't added into your guys figures, like the fact that your guy used SNB (737-3/5) payscales instead of the higher LNB (737-7/8/9) payscales when comparing compensation, etc..
We will all know what the Arbitrators think come Aug/Sept.
If they buy everything that your MC is stating and turn around and say "The CAL MC lied and wasn't believable".. there's nothing I can do about that. Life will go on.
Personally, I think it will be somewhere in the middle..
PPS> I do believe that those pilots on Involuntary Furloughs should be behind the last active pilot on the CAL Side as of the merger date. I don't believe they were furloughed to make this merger happen. I believe they were furloughed due to poor management decisions, the parking of an inefficient fleet that was replaced by Large RJ's, and the fact that your management didn't plan on replacements of those 73's. Those replacement aircraft should have been ordered back in 03-05.
Look, nothing you say is gonna change my opinion, and nothing I say is gonna change yours.
I do know that in 2006, after I had started amassing TPIC hours.. I had my sights set on Delta and then a few below that. United, was not on my radar. Why?!- Because EVERY United Pilot in my squadron hated it, and told me to stay away. "Only come here if there's no other choice". Also, a handful of them actually moved on from UAL Pilots to Fedex/UPS after their furlough. None came to Continental.
I ended up at CAL and I'm happy to be here. Is it perfect, hell no. But my future was looking pretty good in 2007 looking forward. Yes, I was stagnant for a few years after we furloughed 149 pilots. But reality is, I am a lineholder 756 FO flying International like I wanted to. My airline had new aircraft on order (78's and 73NG's) and we had tight Scope.
One of my friends is a 2000 United Newhire. Twice furloughed. Still out. I feel I had better career potential then he had. He feels differently. Strangely, another friend (we were all in the same squadron) was also hired in 2000. One month later. He had no hopes for UAL.
2 UAL Furloughs, 2 different opinions about their own airline.
End of the day (or end of the summer..) yeah, once this SLI is behind us and after the first year of base/equipment changes.. by 2015 I hope things have settled down and gotten better.
Motch
PS> The 2nd inning comment was thrown out there because while you (but not only you) posted slides from the hearings, you didn't mention the redirect where Katz showed where those slides were missing info. Like the Pension funds paid by the company, like the missing 29 million from Air Mic that wasn't added into your guys figures, like the fact that your guy used SNB (737-3/5) payscales instead of the higher LNB (737-7/8/9) payscales when comparing compensation, etc..
We will all know what the Arbitrators think come Aug/Sept.
If they buy everything that your MC is stating and turn around and say "The CAL MC lied and wasn't believable".. there's nothing I can do about that. Life will go on.
Personally, I think it will be somewhere in the middle..
PPS> I do believe that those pilots on Involuntary Furloughs should be behind the last active pilot on the CAL Side as of the merger date. I don't believe they were furloughed to make this merger happen. I believe they were furloughed due to poor management decisions, the parking of an inefficient fleet that was replaced by Large RJ's, and the fact that your management didn't plan on replacements of those 73's. Those replacement aircraft should have been ordered back in 03-05.
05-14-2013, 06:46 PM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by Maxepr1
Your side did the same, wasn't there numbers twisting, missing guam guys? Katz busted a few of them,,,, Center can I have a vector around LAX'es arrogance..... Open up your eyes LAX... your presentation wasn't all high and mighty ...I'm sure nothing was skewed in any of Uniteds' presentation..... It's a game, don't act shocked and all high and mighty it's pathetic....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
