horrido27

Actually, he did bust them. A few times. And like you said, is 6 or 7 thousand dollars the same as lying about a Seniority List?

But, that list is no different than the list that we had when I was hired in 07.
What is "different" is the fact that CAL had some sort of flowback agreements with CalEx. Something that your MC can't come to terms with.
Even one of your own pilots, (FO) KK mentioned how he was hired at BA back in 90, but had he taken his position at CAL in 97, he would have been on 7th yr Longevity. And that at some point, his paychecks said Continental Airlines...

What is worse is that, out of 4700 pilots on the list when this merger went down, you believe that "...lying about a couple thousand DOHs and furloughs?" is true?!
So you actually believe that there are 2000 pilots, out of 4700.. that were furloughed at some point (and don't show it) or have wrong DOH's?!

Wow.

Motch

Flytolive

That was longevity for pay. This is a seniority integration arbitration. KK would have been junior to CAL pilots hired off the street just a week prior.

Actually UAL's MC only claims 780 pilots DOHs were misstated and 196 furloughs were unreported for a total of 4500 years of unmerited mainline longevity.

Agreed.

horrido27

Thanks F2L..
Appreciate the info about the DOH/Furlough numbers.

And I agree, the issue with KK is about Longevity vs. Seniority. I am aware he would (probably) be bidding based on his 97 hire date and at the same time, is (probably) on 12th yr pay anyway!

Thanks for the normal, non attack response.

Motch

ewr756drive

Please...please..I dont get it. What does UAL hope to gain with the "express pilot" longevity correction!?
UAL and ALPA are on record as stating a pre-merger list WILL not be reordered. Who gives a shoit what his "CAL" date is? He still has to be senior to the guy below him on the pre-merge list!
Does UAL want to "move" him now? e.g 3 pilots: '00 hire, '96 hire, '00 hire....are they trying to move the '96 hire out of his #2 senority position (in this example?) If so...that is exactly what UAL/ALPA said would NOT happen! If not...then who gives a f* if he is shown with a '96 or '00 hire date?? (It would be strictly a company data issue not an SLI issue.

ewr756drive

Duplicate......

Flytolive

Longevity is one of the three listed factors of ALPA Merger Policy. There is 4500 years of disputed longevity. Get it?

ewr756drive

What!!!!?????
You didn't even read my question! Try again flytolive.

Probe

Correct about not reordering a pre-existing seniority list.

However, if the l-CAL MEC didn't think longevity or date of hire was important, why go to the trouble of covering up the true DOH and longevity? In effect, they falsified the data to give themselves more DOH and longevity. Did they really think they really wouldn't be called out on it?

They were supposed to submit a "certified" seniority list. I am not a lawyer but I think there are a few legal terms for lying and falsifying numbers. Good thing for them this is an arbitration hearing and not a court of law. But then again, since 4000+ l-CAL pilots have their careers hanging in the balance, I guess being honest and forthright might have been a better choice.

Eisbaer

Why would CAL submit the "wrong" list, knowing full well that the smart guys at UAL are going to catch the errors.

It doesn't make any sense.

Probe

Part of me is &^*ssed off and hopes the arbitrator slams them. But most of me hopes the arbitrator doesn't penalize all l-CAL pilots because of the actions of a few at their MEC. We will see how it plays out.