Airline Pilot Central Forums - So long..........

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- United (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/)

- - So long.......... (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/76949-so-long.html)

I disagree. The UAL MC spent a lot of negotiating equity into trying to get furloughs integrated in with active pilots. To now complain that you did not get more? They put the rest of their ISL proposal at risk by doing this.

I commend the UAL MC's efforts in this, and the arb's decision.

Your lack of confidence in not being able to land another flying gig is not my fault, or my problem. My old squadron mates didn't seem to have this problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aileronjam (Post 1478187)

Integrating some of the (2000 hires) furloughed UAL pilots BEHIND some of the furloughed CAL pilots is inexcusable.

Tell it to the Arbitrators. They made the decision.

You saw what happened when you ask for too much (ala CAL MC Proposal)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probe (Post 1478262)

I disagree. The UAL MC spent a lot of negotiating equity into trying to get furloughs integrated in with active pilots.

As they should have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probe (Post 1478262)

To now complain that you did not get more?

They put the rest of their ISL proposal at risk by doing this.

I commend the UAL MC's efforts in this, and the arb's decision.

I never complained that "I" didn't get more... merely pointing out an inequity in the decision... as have many others on this forum.

I'm certain that the UAL MC and the "arb's" (sic) are gratified to no end that you commend them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probe (Post 1478262)

Your lack of confidence in not being able to land another flying gig is not my fault, or my problem. My old squadron mates didn't seem to have this problem.

Nowhere did I indicate that it was intended to be "your problem"... you seem a little sensitive.

The point being made was that your flippant remarks about how easy it is finding other suitable employment was out of line. To think that it's as simple as that is an indication that you don't really have much of a clue. That's all... pretty simple really. Maybe you shouldn't take things so personally?

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot (Post 1478264)

Tell it to the Arbitrators. They made the decision.

You saw what happened when you ask for too much (ala CAL MC Proposal)

It's not too much to ask for them to follow the ALPA merger policy. The furloughed CAL pilots had less equity in EACH tenet of the merger policy, so how are they placed above UAL furloughees?

It's really a rhetorical question, I already know the answer. It's over and that's fine... it is what it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probe (Post 1478169)

I empathize with the double furloughees, but at the same time, they have to accept responsibility for their choices, even if it was just bad luck.

If I were a 2000 or 2001 hire at UAL, and saw all our work rules go away in bankruptcy, I would have never looked back at UAL. We didn't outsource flying right away to RJ's, we outsourced flying to - ourselves. We flew the same number of flights with A LOT fewer pilots.

The more senior furloughees had a brighter outlook.

I have a half a dozen old squadron mates that were hired at UAL in 2000-2001. All are JB , Fedex, UPS, SWA, etc. None are ever coming back to UAL.

I think the arbs were wise in integrating some of the furloughs with active, but not all.

In the end, we take the cards we are dealt, and make our own choices. Choosing to come to UAL for the 3rd time?

I like to think I would have been a faster learner than that.

What I learned fast was that despite the best of choices is that there is always a group of pilots that will work cheaper and do management's VJM dirty work and aid mergers. Our 30 airplane parking turned into 94 overnight once Glenn found a CEO merger buddy that had just the group for the job. Save the conspiracy heckles...I lived it.
Glad you agree w the arbitrators...don't forget CAL MCwanted to staple ~1600 never furloughed! Oh yeah, bet we upgrade faster than your buds that bailed, but I won't then bust anyone's marbles for their hindsight choice! How come none of your squadron mates didnt bail to CAL? Maybe they weren't smart and charmed enough?
Maybe your buds should have chose a JV team back in 2000 to avoid getting caught up in a direct attack from extremist terrorists. If only we could have had your genius powers and chose wisely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot (Post 1478264)

Tell it to the Arbitrators. They made the decision.

You saw what happened when you ask for too much (ala CAL MC Proposal)

What exactly is "too much" in the case of the post you replied to? What compelled you to use your energy to reply with that kind of response? Does one usually get more by asking for less? Serious questions. Thanks in advance for your reply.

I was a 95 hire. After 9/11, I took a leave of absence. Not to work, just for time away from the buffoonery that was going to be the industry.

I didn't seek work during this time. Before coming back, I should have applied to JB,SW,Fedex,UPS.

I chose poorly as well. I have to live with it also.

Then I took a VF in 08.
Came back 6 months ago as a u-hire.

Well, in hindsight, I was stupid, twice, as well.

LOL