Motch,

No one knows exactly what will happen. I don't think the threshold for a negative reaction will be your proposal. Even if the resulting isl is a split between ours and yours, the blowback unfortunately, will be strong and long lasting.

 

You may want to put your "windbreaker" on then!

 

Enjoy your career.

 

But ST.. a question for you.
You feel that if the decision is a split, then there will be blowback. But which scenario do you see where there won't be "blowback"?

If the list were to be like the LCAL Proposal.. I would imagine the LUAL guys would blow a gasket. (no pun intended and I for one do NOT expect it to be exactly like the LCAL proposal).
However..
If the list were to be like the LUAL Proposal.. don't you think there would be blowback from the LCAL Side?!

I think the saving grace will be this-
No matter what happens, the Arbitrators will explain their reason for making the list what it is. Gonna be hard to be ****ed at the other side if the Arbitrators explain why they did what they did.

Also, lets be honest.. the mixing of crews won't really take place on a large scale for at least a year from now. Which will give both sides time to settle down, and also move up and around, based on planned retirements PLUS the guys who take the Early Out (LOA19).

The BlowBack could be strong and long lasting.. but who does it benefit?
I just hope no matter what happens, the average line pilot still tries to learn and Fly the Contract.. and also (at least) reads the union comm and tries to stay alittle connected with their Union.

Of course if the union remains split based on past Legacy allegiances, then we will never truly unify and the company will continue to do what it is doing.

Just my .02cents and opinion.
Motch

 

Only you can prevent forest fires!

 

What decisions by the arbitrators do you think will lead to a unified MEC. Maybe Moak presiding over the first United MEC meeting and election of leaders will lobby hard for split executive board. With a majority of the LEC votes, I don't see the UAL side going for it if the UAL side gets hosed by the arbitrators.

 

Motch,

I honestly have no idea where the line of anger and discontent is. For a few, given their specific circumstances, there is no isl the arbs could produce that would seem remotely defensible.

Many UAL pilots feel that our proposal, rooted is merger policy, is fair. Some, after looking at your one for one status proposal, feel we did not go far enough. Your proposal by most, is not taken seriously and looked upon as a conduit for a compromise. A compromised position which the CAL side hoped for all along. That is why I say if the proposals were split, many on our side would take issue.

 

Its going to happen.

The CAL proposal did that. They proposed putting furloughed CAL pilots ahead of active UAL pilots. So you can't argue that active pilots deserve to be ahead of furloughed ones, and then propose the opposite.

Also, if you read the CAL talking points of "The merger didn't happen until 2013 so they were all active" then you have to count the returning UAL furloughs to the CAL side as active CAL pilots. They are, after all, on the CAL list. The CAL proposal STAPLED them behind the UAL furloughed pilots. (i.e. they were stapled below themselves)

So either way you look at the the CAL proposal RECOGNIZES and CONFIRMS that it is OK to put furloughed pilots ahead of active ones.

Also the most recent merger using the new policy "Pinnacle/Mesaba/Colgan" did exactly that. The furloughed pilots got their DOH within their status and category of RJ FO, even though there were furloughed.

Even with the furloughed pilots being placed with active pilots, nobody's relative percentage changes more than 5%.

If you staple those 1,400 pilots, then the 100% CAL pilot get a windfall of having 1,400 UAL pilots, some with 7 or more years of longevity, placed below him.

Also, the United side has over 2,000 retirements in the next 5 years. In about 10 years the retirements start to run around 400 per year just on the UAL side.

On the CAL side there are only THREE YEARS of the next 20 years, where retirements are over 200. They are 205,208, and 210.

UAL has just one year where over 500 UAL pilots retire.

So the UAL retirements and those jobs MORE THAN MAKE UP FOR furloughed pilots being placed with active ones. The CAL pilots benefit FAR MORE from UAL retirements than vice versa.

So I understand your angst, but its why they changed the policy. To protect pilots who have put in their time, and because of a timing of a furlough, still get credit for their longevity.

 

Neither of the last TWO major airlines got a "split" proposal.

In US/AWA, US asked for DOH. AWA asked for Status and Category. The arbitrators picked Status and Category.

In DAL/NWA, NWA asked for DOH. DAL asked for Status and Category. The arbitrators picked Status and Category.

Post both of these, Longevity was added.

So it makes sense to just put EQUAL WEIGHT to these, which was the UAL proposal

So the idea of a goal post, extreme proposal, and meeting in the middle, aren't relevant. That's not what the past arbitrators did.

They just picked a WINNER and in this case, there is NO WAY the CAL proposal will get picked.

It will be the UAL proposal. It SIGNIFICANTLY analyzed both short and long term and is fair and equitable and follows policy.

If you think the arbitrators will "meet in the middle" so that the CAL side can feel like they won or got something out of it, you are sorely mistaken.

The BEST THING that the UAL pilots could have hoped for was a ridiculous proposal from the CAL side, and that's EXACTLY what they delivered.

 

Motch,

I never said I believe the arbitrators would meet in the middle.