CAL proposed fencing off the 787 for the first 31 airplanes until 2018!!!

CAL pilot said the work rules in the new contract HURT THEM. Said that trips they used to fly they can't because the work rule changes restrict the company from pushing the pilots, so now the pilots have to "back off on their flying". <--- Seriously.

Arbitrator asked CAL pilot if he would rather have 48 extra days off a year on the widebody and the CAL pilot said NO. He liked the extra flying?!?!

The trend from 2010 to 2013 was used as "how great the future was at Continental!!" This trend line was extended to show how much growth was going to happen.

The CAL side kept referring to April 2013 as the "Merger Completion date".

CAL proposes merging their 2013 seniority list and our 2010 seniority list.

They used individual examples of why the UAL list doesn't make sense, like that UAL proposed putting a pilot who was a 777 FO the same seniority as a 737 CAP, even though the 777 FO could have held 767 Captain at United.

They tried to ignore stovepiping again, and just look at what pilots had certain bids and then claim all the pilots above that junior pilot have that entitlement. (We've seen that repeatedly on this board, so basically 80% of all the CAL pilots can hold 737 Captain, but obviously they can't really.)

One of the CAL pilots kept referring to "Captains Today". Of course they weren't in 2010 when the merger happened.

Under cross, one of the CAL pilots admitted they didn't analyze a lot of scenarios. He referred to his "gut" and "heart of hearts" <--- seriously

CAL admits that they only considered CAP and FO. They didn't break down category because it ISNT DEFINED. WOW!!

Spent A LOT of time trying to re prove the failed idea of W-2 wages as a factor, but then only picked out examples that benefitted them.

CAL pilot testified that CAL pilots "chase the money"


So they don't like the widebodies, they don't have value, but when a widebody fence was proposed by UAL side they FREAKED out, THEN PROPOSED THEIR OWN WIDEBODY FENCE!!!

 

LAX thank-you for your synopsis of the last 3 days. I trust your analysis to be accurate and admit that I am done reading the tedium and am awaiting the verdict, but it's nice to have a summary available so I have a sense of what's going on.

 

Yeah I read it as well. LAX is spot on.
I really think the CAL side is very poorly represented. I hope it doesn't hurt them. I really want a fair award. I don't want a big bump in seniority as I don't want to go to work for the rest of my life with a pilot sitting next to me who thinks I screwed him.

Unfortunately JP and the boys don't feel the same way.

 

There are many zombies that consider FOX News or MSNBC to be real sources for news analysis. LAX is either Sean Hannity or Rachel Maddow depending on your stripes in this merger. Either way you are part of the blind sheep if you actually pay heed to LAX's views. Then again this is a board full of airline pilots...

 

Did you read the testimony?

 

That post looks like it was after a few (many) beers on an asian layover.....basic dribble.

J

 

LOL, you have to ask?

 

I'm not sure who "the boys" are, but I share your sentiments exactly. I want the award to be as fair and equitable as possible.

This may sound a little crazy, but I really don't think the representation will make much of a difference in the end. Someone on here - I think maybe it was Sunvox - attended some of the hearings and got the impression the whole thing was Kabuki theater. Just going through the motions even though it's essentially already decided.

To piggyback on that I'd say that ALPA's first instinct is self-preservation. It won't allow an ISL to be published that pi$$es off the larger pilot group; that would mean the end of ALPA at United. They learned their lesson with the Nicolau Award and what happened at US Airways.

Regardless of what happens, I agree that I'd much rather lose a few percentage points in seniority than spend the next 20 years with guys who think I stole from them. Hopefully most pilots on both sides agree with that.

 

Nope. Not much of a priority in life esp since no amount of my analysis will swing the arbitrators. On the CAL boards there are countless posts using quotes from the testimony that showed the UAL side looking utterly foolish just as LAX implies for CAL. So basically we have irritating blowhards just like LAX on our side. It's become increasingly clear to me that just as with pundits, the SLI analysts of the internet should be ignored.

 

I share most of your sentiment, I disagree with one aspect however. I don't think either side, regardless of outcome will have stolen anything. The award will be what the arbitrators think is fair and equitable for both sides.