If you can't connect the dots then standby and let others make the decision for you. That's the way you've done it in the past.

 

I can connect the dots, and color inside the lines ... And the picture I see when I look at your "art" is more of the same BS ... Shut up and color, now you have made us mad, time to pay for what you have done ... Ok, sure, now lets move on and get to work please.

Post unified MEC, there will probably be 5 LECs "controlled" by L-UAL types, and 4 LECs controlled by L-CAL types, with SEA going away, and the training centers split one for each side; eventually, there will be mixed types in every domicile, and enough new blood in the overall mix that will serve to neutralize the L-UAL numerical advantage. I don't want my union wasting time on old battles just to get "even"' or to advantage one side over the other ... I want them to do what is right for everyone, or at least in theory. I guess you think it is going to be different?

 

I respect you bumped, but your in fantasy land here. JP Morgan and other powerful parties would have ensured that Congress did not delay this merger over the squabbles of airline pilots. I'll take Jamie Dimon and his cronies over ALPA any day.

Thus the only contract offer in 2010 was DAL's BK contract. Anything else would have required a similar multi year period of company stalling and NMB semi action. So did you think DAL's BK contract in 2010 was adequate enough to send to the membership? If so I find that utterly pathetic.

 

For some reason you think your side has won some kind of battle and now want to move on to peace so you can enjoy the spoils. You won nothing and there are no spoils. Where were you and what have you been doing to unify the pilot groups over the past 3 years. I'd venture to guess you were like many on the CAL side and letting greed cloud you thinking.

 

Did I say that you said that? Ummm. No, I most certainly did not, so don't attribute that to me. I don't need an apology; I am not insecure like that.

Guppies were replaced by... nothing, nothing at all.

Besides, CAL already had 737s to be used for the merger.

 

You could very well be correct. Merely speculation on my part based on what my local reps were pedaling at the time, the pace of negotiatons at the time, and what DAL was able to accomplish with their merger. Of course, they also got a contract EARLY this latest go around, so clearly they have a different management team than we.

Interestingly, it seemed to work out ok for us thanks to our brothers and sisters at DAL raising the bar for us to hang our hat on. It would be interesting to see how much equity we lost and then compare how much we gained by going behind DAL on this contract cycle. No way to calculate that obviously, just curiosity

 

Well this is what you said in response to my post regarding the parking of our Guppies;


No scope provisions? Management parks mainline airplanes and replaces with 90 seat airframes and calls them RJs.

Strong scope? Management parks mainline airplanes and replaces with mainline airplanes.

Seems to me that the pilots do have control of what will be the replacement airplane.



So in this case, the 737 parking was NOT countered with replacement RJ's, so I'm not sure where your above quote came from.

Second, after I pointed this out, you made a sarcastic remark that seemed to insinuate that I was suggesting Tilton parked the 737 fleet to right-size for the merger. Maybe you didn't direct that at me, but you posted it in direct reply to what I said.

For the record, I have no idea whether Tilton parked the Guppy fleet for a merger, or if the fuel cost of the day gave him yet another excuse to shrink LUAL. The only one who REALLY knows is Tilton. And yes; he's pretty close to the devil to a lot of us

 

"Jay Pierce shot JFK according to the L-UAL pilots." LOL

 

The benefit of using 2013 numbers is probably as simple as any pilot no longer active will be off the list.

 

Actually, it also substantially increases the longevity credit for many CAL pilots (nearly 3 years to be exact) while the corporation was being managed by a single entity. There is no way to predict what would have been for either company post Oct 2010 (merger closing date) sans merger. We can all presuppose to our heart's delight based on the color of our respective uniforms, but there is no precedence for what the CAL side proposed in that matter. What happened after that date should have no bearing (has not ever in any merger to the best of my knowledge, nor has a date later than the merger closing date ever been used by an arbitration panel) on the SLI process. We'll see if the arb panel agrees.

Scott