Sunvox

So basically the biggest ongoing complaint I have heard from my CAL friends (who thankfully do NOT frequent APC) is the sincerely held belief that CAL was going to grow with or without the merger. So I thought I'd lay down some simple facts. What's funny is that I have no doubt the CAL brethren here on APC will view said facts as staunch proof that their growth since 2010 is all their doing and was coming regardless of the merger whilst the UAL brethren will most certainly disagree.

Fact 1: TPA exhibit A.




Which clearly shows a potentially large increase in 737 planes as there were only 32 remaining 737-500s to be retired.


Fact 2 from CAL 2009 Annual Report:


Fact 3 the current UAL Fleet Plan:





Fact 4: Since May of 2010 the combined UAL fleet has gone from 694 planes to a planned 692 planes for the end of 2013, but the UAL fleet has seen a net decrease and the CAL fleet has seen a net increase.

Fact 5: CAL 767 flying has diminished because they lost 10 out of 26 planes.

Fact 6: CAL has a 787 to replace it's retired 767.

Fact 7: CAL 737s are flying 64% of the flying that UAL 737s did in 2008.





So why do you bring this up brethren Joe?

I'm glad you ask.


Because, it has been hypothesized that the CAL MEC raised CAL pilot expectations overly high and as a result have created a sense of entitlement and possible disappointment for a long time to come.

To me the facts show that any expectation of "organic growth" at CAL absent a merger have been shown by reality and history to have been zero.

LAX Pilot

You mean shrinking every year since 2006 then "magically" starting to grow when merged with United in 2010?

Oh wait, the merger didn't happen until 2013 and CAL just naturally expanded into DEN, LAX, and ORD because they would have done that all along.

And all this time UAL had 3,000 "extra" pilots and for some reason only 1,400 of them are on furlough. I guess management just wanted to have "spare" pilots for cancellations.

The other one I love is that all the extra UAL bases aren't necessary and make UAL have extra pilots.

So UAL has 7 bases. LAX, SFO, SEA, DEN, ORD, JFK, IAD. <--- Deemed too many by CAL Merger Committee which is why UAL has extra pilots.

CAL has 7 bases. GUM, EWR, CLE, IAH, ORD, DEN, LAX. <--- somehow with CAL they don't have too many pilots.

SEDPA

So why then has CAL added 500ish jobs since MAD, but pre JCBA, and why didn't UAL get those jobs?

LAX Pilot

UAL added those jobs. They put them on the CAL side because it was CHEAPER!

Total costs on the CAL side were less.

flybynuts

Because, it has been hypothesized that the CAL MEC raised CAL pilot expectations overly high and as a result have created a sense of entitlement and possible disappointment for a long time to come.

Joe,
In all fairness, the same can be said for the "arrogance and entitlement because we are better than the scab airline" sentiment that your brethren frequently portray on this website. If we were that worried about disappointment then why haven't we started a legal find drive to fight this in court like some UAL have?

I was pleased with the CAL fleet plan go forward separately and now to see we will be fewer airplanes than currently doesn't make me happy.


Also, why weren't you on the negotiating team since you have a flair for presenting your facts as the real and only facts and thus it must be true?

Sept. can't come soon enough in my mind.

SEDPA

Really? Most of those hired between MAD and the UPA were payed as if they were recalled to L-UAL ... and more to the point, every one could have been recalled to L-UAL and the cost to the company would have been just about the same. Take a another guess.

intrepidcv11

The BK judge doesn't set the work rules just the pot of money. UAL ALPA decided to coddle the WB guys at the direct expense of NB guys. It happen to an extent at CAL with Contract '02. I hope that BS stops in the future.

LAX Pilot

Not true. While they were given the UAL PAYRATES, they operated under the CAL contract for every other aspect. Plus when they ran out of pilots, they were able to bring in new hires who would be paid at year 1 pay.

It would have been far more expensive to pay those pilots the same rate on the UAL side with all the extra costs to the company because of the UAL contract, plus be forced to continue their longevity pay increases every year, etc.

SEDPA

Ok ... So your contract resulted in UCH hiring 500 at sCAL INSTEAD of at sUAL ... and that should have no bearing on the arbs SLI award?

LAX Pilot

Yes. Our more expensive contract forced the flying to the cheaper side of the airline. Eventually, this benefited the CAL side more than the UAL side. Since we are all under the same contract now, UAL pilots didn't get to benefit as much.

The arbitrators know that the UAL contract was superior to the CAL one. So did management, which is why they put the flying where they did.

The arbitrators aren't going to award the CAL side for a lousy contract as being one of the equities brought to the merger.