Search

Notices

Political Posturing -

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-30-2013 | 01:20 PM
  #51  
LAX Pilot's Avatar
Peace Love Understanding
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
From: Airbus
Default

Originally Posted by routemap
Pretty much!!

I think it's just people dealing with the stress of the ISL. If it makes someone feel better claiming they are right, and in a better position then so be it.

The arbitration award will probably be a surprise to both sides.
I agree. I think they will not go with the 50% longevity and provide a much higher percentage factor similar to the Colgan Pinnacle Mesaba award of 100% within each status and category class.
Reply
Old 06-30-2013 | 05:42 PM
  #52  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Default

The only person who will be happy is number 1, everyone else will be disappointed.
Reply
Old 06-30-2013 | 05:54 PM
  #53  
cadetdrivr's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Jaded N Cynical
The only person who will be happy is number 1, everyone else will be disappointed.
Just as long as everyone else will be equally disappointed....

Reply
Old 06-30-2013 | 07:57 PM
  #54  
larryiah's Avatar
Straight Outta Map School
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Staller
Larry - we know how you feel about supporting our troops in harms way. Would you like to give us your opinion of Snowden?
Don't know much about his personal life, but I like what he did.
Reply
Old 07-01-2013 | 11:52 AM
  #55  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by gettinbumped
I can appreciate those thoughts. Overall, I think the goal is to have more Widebodies, but certainly there is a benefit to getting an earlier upgrade on a NB. I don't know how it is on the LCAL side, but the LUAL side seniority for WB F/O's is pretty equal to NB CAP. The money is better on the narrowbody, but the QOL is much better on the WB, so it seems to split folks down the middle.
Pre-UPA payscales drove some differences in the two groups. Our 737 pay on the -8/900s (most of the fleet) was only about 12 percent below WB pay, so while the QOL was generally better on the WB, the pay difference was significant between WB FO and NB captain. As a broad generality, commuters stayed as WB FOs longer, but locals left for the money of the 737 left seat. At LUAL there was generally no pay difference, so why go to the NB left seat? The UPA payscale changes that, bringing the pay between WB FO and NB captain closer together for LCAL and farther apart for LUAL, so I think you'll see LUAL pilots leaving for the left seat sooner and LCAL WB FOs staying in the WB longer.

By the "merger date", which one are you using to determine that LUAL pilots will push LCAL pilots out of their seats? I can see that being a concern for sure, but from our perspective there are 3 years of upgrades (some of them 2006 hires) who will not be flushed, and will continue to hold that seat even though they couldn't have dreamed of it in 2010. So certainly both sides have their frustrations and concerns.
I was talking about 2010. I understand the concerns about LCAL growth in the interim.

Anyway, looking forward to putting this in the rearview.
Agreed
Reply
Old 07-01-2013 | 04:31 PM
  #56  
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 0
From: A320 Cap
Default

Originally Posted by XHooker
Pre-UPA payscales drove some differences in the two groups. Our 737 pay on the -8/900s (most of the fleet) was only about 12 percent below WB pay, so while the QOL was generally better on the WB, the pay difference was significant between WB FO and NB captain. As a broad generality, commuters stayed as WB FOs longer, but locals left for the money of the 737 left seat. At LUAL there was generally no pay difference, so why go to the NB left seat? The UPA payscale changes that, bringing the pay between WB FO and NB captain closer together for LCAL and farther apart for LUAL, so I think you'll see LUAL pilots leaving for the left seat sooner and LCAL WB FOs staying in the WB longer.

I was talking about 2010. I understand the concerns about LCAL growth in the interim.

Agreed
That's a good point about the pay change. Will be interesting to see how it shuffles out when this is all over.
Reply
Old 07-03-2013 | 07:22 AM
  #57  
Sluggo300's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: A-320 F/O
Default Here's my take........

Originally Posted by Staller
It appears the cal MEC or at least the people of HOUSTON have decided to start posturing for a combined MEC. I'm not sure of the true intent of this post but you can tell that there is an attempt to make UAL MEC the responsible party for the problems the two mec's have had/are having. Make one thing clear - if you look at the background of al the things listed in the post, the UAL MEC actions were in reaction to misguided deeds of the cal MEC and their mc.

Not to point the author out - he's a good guy. But he made some strong claims of losing a 7 years seniority if the UAL SLI proposal is accepted - would any of our cal brothers like to support his claim - APC225, a good neutral and capable, you want to chime in with a true assessment?

I'll give it a shot on Bens claim of potentially losing 7 years. In the Ual sli proposal, Ben is 1 number senior to me. He is a 2005 hire at Cal. I am a 9-14-1998 hire at Ual. I have been at ual the entire time and I was lucky enough to not have been furloughed. It would seem to me that he gains 7 years vice losing that time. I no longer have the Ual proposal so I don't know if Bens relative seniority in this proposal was a gain or a loss but I suspect it was a loss. R/S......sluggo
Reply
Old 07-03-2013 | 08:14 AM
  #58  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
From: A-320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by Sluggo300
I'll give it a shot on Bens claim of potentially losing 7 years. In the Ual sli proposal, Ben is 1 number senior to me. He is a 2005 hire at Cal. I am a 9-14-1998 hire at Ual. I have been at ual the entire time and I was lucky enough to not have been furloughed. It would seem to me that he gains 7 years vice losing that time. I no longer have the Ual proposal so I don't know if Bens relative seniority in this proposal was a gain or a loss but I suspect it was a loss. R/S......sluggo
Sluggo:

I still think the merger of CAL/UAL will be positive for all of us as soon as we get past the isl and start rowing together. I understand bk, stagnation and furloughs; I left usair to come here. I could have held 756 CA on the last bid, I currently hold 737 CA and held it 5 years ago in 2008. The UAL proposal places me squarely as a nb f/o. I've NEVER been a nb f/o at CAL; so in the status and category criteria, not doh, I'm losing at least 7 years. Whatever the case may be, I hold no ill will towards any UAL Pilot. But like I said, I've never been a nb f/o at CAL or been remotely in danger of furlough. I don't particularly care to do that now, but the chips will fall where they fall.

Thanks for your honesty and candor.

Frats,

Ben
Reply
Old 07-03-2013 | 11:11 AM
  #59  
oldmako's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 3
From: The GF of FUPM
Default

Originally Posted by Ben Salley
Sluggo:

I still think the merger of CAL/UAL will be positive for all of us as soon as we get past the isl and start rowing together.....

Frats,

Ben
Allow me to disagree 100%. Our merged airline has the potential to be positive once a new management team arrives or this one does an about face. The key word being 'potential'.

The current crew cannot see the morass they have created (through incompetence, misaligned priorities etc) and they will not acknowledge the fact that the high dollar customers are leaving in droves. They focus on the bad widgets refusing to do this or that, and the nickles and the dimes. As they do that, we lose money. As we lose money, they cut back the schedule and expand the Barbi-Jet operation.

Painting airplanes is not enough. We can grunt and row our asses off with perfect syncopation until our hands bleed and our spines scream. It won't matter as long as the helmsman is spending all his time having his picture taken and making videos. It won't matter as long as the mid level managers view them selves as disciplinarians as opposed to problem solvers and coalition builders.

I have only seen the airline function this poorly one time. The summer of 2000 when they were giddy at the idea of merging with USAir, starting a fractional operation and who knows what else. It was easy to blame the pilots yet there was no one to park the planes, no one to fuel the planes, no one to handle the bags, no one to do the push, etc etc etc.

Blocking and tackling are essential in this type of an operation. Yet, we are failing at the basics and "costs are out of control" RIGHT!

My rose colored glasses are turd brown. The sad thing is, I'm ready to row.
Reply
Old 07-03-2013 | 12:04 PM
  #60  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Ben Salley
Sluggo:

I still think the merger of CAL/UAL will be positive for all of us as soon as we get past the isl and start rowing together. I understand bk, stagnation and furloughs; I left usair to come here. I could have held 756 CA on the last bid, I currently hold 737 CA and held it 5 years ago in 2008. The UAL proposal places me squarely as a nb f/o. I've NEVER been a nb f/o at CAL; so in the status and category criteria, not doh, I'm losing at least 7 years. Whatever the case may be, I hold no ill will towards any UAL Pilot. But like I said, I've never been a nb f/o at CAL or been remotely in danger of furlough. I don't particularly care to do that now, but the chips will fall where they fall.

Thanks for your honesty and candor.

Frats,

Ben
Ben,

If the LUAL proposal prevails, you still won't be in danger of furlough...just the LUAL pilots.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jungle
Money Talk
1
04-21-2011 09:56 PM
Copperhed51
Hangar Talk
14
05-02-2010 09:41 AM
767pilot
Cargo
115
10-15-2009 06:19 PM
A320fumes
Major
11
09-17-2008 03:24 PM
Young Jack
Cargo
2
02-12-2008 08:42 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices