Double post

True Terry. I also won't be in any danger of Captaining my rightfully awarded airplane for a decade or so. I doubt we see any furloughs, unless Delta buys us, or we liquidate.

-Ben

Not so fast.....

When you were a new hire, on a stovepiped status and category basis, you were a 737 FO. Just because pilots above you chose to stay in that seat and there were 757 FO slots available in your new hire class, didn't mean that you jumped in seniority ahead of everyone in a 737 FO seat.

Also, on the day of the merger, you were #3,462 out of #4,659 active pilots. This was based on the list your union provided.

Also, on the CAL staffing roster, there were these many of seats available for each position.

777 CAP = 211
767 CAP = 603
737 CAP = 1253
777 FO = 440
767 FO = 839
737 FO = 1292

So when you add them up, in order to get out of the 737 FO status and category you have to be at #3,346 on the list, with everyone below that a 737 FO in a strict stovepipe method.
(211 + 603 + 1253 + 440 + 839 = 3,346)

You were 3,462 and you were in the 737 FO stovepipe, even though you flew as a 767 FO. We had the same at United with guys in the bottom of the seniority list as 767 FOs.

So you actually NEVER left that category. Also remember that we are remaking a list that should have been done in 2010, and so this is a historical event. The final list will have pilots who have retired removed and then all the constructive notice pilots put below everyone.

Also, you had 5 years longevity at the MAD date and the UAL pilots had 12 years. Longevity is a tenet of merger policy as well.

Whatever happened since 2010 is not relevant.

Not to insult, but I get the feeling it would be very relevant if the shoe were on the other foot. I moved from %72 to %59 percent since 2010, with CAL aircraft. Tell me more about this magic wand that makes my advancement irrelevant?

Then what you are saying is that all CAL movement since 2010 is solely because of the CAL network and CAL hubs, independent of anything else and it had zero to do with the joined route structure with UAL?

Come to think of it, didn't CAL join STAR in 2008? And that didn't affect anything either? Uh... sure.

Its United flying. CAL would not have opened bases in LAX, ORD, and DEN absent the merger.

But everyone has ignored the point of my post. At the MAD date, Ben was in the 737 FO status and category bucket.

Just because management made decisions that vastly affected one side of the operation differently after the merger happened, that should not penalize the pilots that were not favored. That's why we have ONE seniority list.

So it doesn't matter what happened after the merger.

Meaningless numbers. You are only looking at some of the population. The lists should have been merged at 2010, but the new policy changed it to after joint JCBA.

All of that advancement should have taken place for both sides. All United pilots should have access to those opportunities.

Also, you are counting UAL PILOTS, who are already on the UAL LIST as being below you!!! They aren't CAL pilots. They are UAL pilots. So its a fantasy 59% you are looking at.

None of it would have happened absent the merger.

Boxer:

What I'm absolutely not saying is anything that remotely resembles an sli arbitration. That ship has sailed. I'm simply pointing out that if one of those proposals is adopted, I take an $80k paycut and loose a lot of my bidding power and job security. If the other is adopted, life pretty much continues as is. Sorry, but I don't like one of those scenarios.

What I KNOW is that not you, I, or any other Pilot on this board authored one word in either proposal. And that the sooner we accept that and start working together, the sooner we can hold smisek accountable for how he is mishandling OUR collective futures. I assure you that the arbitrators are not combing APC for advice on how they handle this. As someone who has lived through the USAirways SLI, trust me, this thing will get FAR worse if we allow it to.

Please read tpa Exibit A; it's brutally honest about aircraft deliveries.

Frats,

-Ben

I respectfully disagree. You aren't losing anything, because there will be no flush of seats. There has been a windfall for LCAL pilots over the past 3 years due to the merger. UCH has desired to keep capacity flat, and has done that by adding planes to the LCAL side while parking planes on the LUAL side. So the windfall that LCAL pilots have enjoyed over the past 3 years of grow has allowed you to advance at a much faster rate than you would have on a go-it-alone basis, while those of us on the LUAL side have been sliding backwards. In addition, you will be able to keep that windfall after the SLI because you will not be flushed out of the seats even though you can't hold them on the combined list. So unless you bid out, you won't be losing the $80k you claim you will. The numbers you are using to compare what you "lost" in the LUAL proposal are based on your PRESENT SEAT, are they not? Again, sorry, but based on precedent, that is not a perspective that is accurate or valid. I apologize for the lack of empathy, but for the past 3 years I've been continuing to slide backwards so that UCH can keep its capacity flat while watching the LCAL side enjoy all the advancement. It's time to level the playing field.

Ben-

Fair enough.

But since we are playing the "let's look at the exhibits game," let's also review the evidence provided by UAL's witness (based on sCAL's actual staffing) that was also brutally honest.

This exhibit and testimony, which was also undisputed by CAL on both cross and rebuttal, demonstrated ALL of the so-called manpower "growth" at sCAL after 2010 occurred by increasing the sCAL staffing at pre-merger sUAL bases even as sCAL staffing was reduced at pre-merger sCAL bases. In contrast, while sUAL also moved pilots to pre-merger sCAL bases, this was a "net" neutral change in staffing at sUAL as pilots were simply moved laterally 1:1.

I find it highly disingenuous that you talk about unity going forward while still laying exclusive claim to flying that would never have happened at an independent CAL but did occur after the merger and while UCH was operating both subsidiaries as a single network system.