Yeah...you're right. I'm over it, till an LUAL type gets in my face and gloats.

 

It looks like there say a lot of weirdness on the cal list before this. How do 79/80 hires at cal start off junior to 84 hires at Cal?

I know a late 89 hire at ual that went from 28% to 30%. Not bad, and better than it would have been under the Ual proposal.

That person is senior to the 79 hire which won't make him happy, but it looks like he's been unhappy for a long time before this even started.

 

Because the 87 hire at LCAL was his EXPRESS hire date. Many of the LCAL pilots whose DOH are listed are showing CALEX hire dates instead of their mainline start date. Example: If you look up JP, he shows a 1989 DOH and is below a 1992 LUAL pilot. However, JP did not turn the wheel of a mainline airplane until 1997. Thus he REALLY is slotted next to someone 5 years senior to him.

 

Yep I am a 1997 hire who is slotted in between two LCAL 1996 hires with an LCAL 2001 hire senior to us just ten guys up the list. Relatively speaking I am within 2% of we're I was before.

 

Lighten Up Francis.

 

Wrong...I was hired in March of 1987. I was not at CALEX or any other airline. Please explain again.

 

Same here. 1.8% from my 2010 position, since that is what list was put together from.

 

So you are worried that you are paired with someone who is 2 years behind you in longevity. GROW UP. I'm behind someone with 3 years less longevity than I am. And there are folks on this forum who are behind guys with 8 years longevity.

So what you, as a 1987 hire LCAL pilot, were advocating for was DOH. Fine my me!!! You'll get lynched by the bottom 60% of your own list but who cares right? Ladder up!!!

 

I haven't commented on the results of the SLI on the forums until now, but not all of us are doing this. I went back and looked at my previous seniority of L-CAL only pilots and compared it with today's new list of ALL United pilots (not including the constructive notice/new-hire pilots). I lost nothing and ended up with a little more than 3% bump in relative seniority. Of course if you include the CNPs, that percentage change is greater, but that isn't a good comparison to where we all were when this started.

Some of my friends aren't happy and are saying they are losing seniority, but maybe I am just more objective than many are being. Compare apples to apples, not apples to Harleys. I crunch their numbers and they just don't like the answer I give them.

This is done....it's time to move on. Am I really the only L-CAL pilot not upset or mad about the new list?

 

I did just okay. Not happy about 89 hires jumping ahead of 87 hires. Basically telling me those two years didn't mean anything. I am not happy with the way our "savior" Brucia helped us out with all his expertise. Then there's alpo....don't get me started.