So long..........
 

Fraternal Brothers,

Through no fault of our own, we've been sidelined for over 10 years. All that time we've been tuning in and following along; the Forgotten, steaming up the windows from the outside looking in, full of what has turned out to be false hope and misplaced surety, confident that our Union of Bretheren were keepin' a weather eye out for us.

Now the decision has been made and we've been left disenfranchised; The Lost Boys of 2000-2001. The ones you neglected to remember when you smashed together these lists and stapled us behind the class of 2008.

It's alright; It's okay. We understand, and, most importantly (to you) it won't affect you and yours in any way.

The lads we'll take it out on is the lads behind us. No chance we'll be giving them any consideration or quarter; Why would we. We weren't given any. When the time comes....and it'll come, don't worry; we'll make selfish, me first decisions based on our own needs with no thought to what our juniors should get or deserve, same as you did. Well Done.

So here's to Fraternity; the lie of the Union; All for One and One for Number One.

See you in hell, Laddies,

The Disenfranchised

p.s. Despite all the setbacks, I'm young enough and healthy enough that I'll spit on all yer graves anyways, ya bastards.

Strong letter to follow?

Carl

When WHO smashed the lists together? You feel something horrible happened to you so you are going to do the same to others given the opportunity? My kids think that way. It doesn't help.

Your welcome for our families contributions to the furlough fund. Guess we left you high and dry there too

We actually did better for furloughed pilots than anyone else in history.

Furloughed placed with active was a major part of the SLI process for UAL pilots....and we got it.

It's definitely been a raw deal for all UAL pilots who were furloughed. Blaming your fellow pilots is kind of stupid though.

I'm about 3,000 numbers junior to the CAL pilots hired on the exact same day as me. We're all ****ed (especially since CAL was a last resort airline back in the 1990's and those guys now get super seniority). I guess we need to get over it.

You mean me as a 727 Captain in 2001 paying $300 per month in furlough assessment voluntarily so that those guys could have COBRA benefits?

Agree. A ton of friends of mine didn't get hired at UAL. DAL, etc but end up at CAL in the late 90s and it ends up being better than if they'd actually had their first choice airline.

While I respect your right to vent; you have been through a lot...
What in the Award did you see from the Arbitrators' thought process that would have gotten you what you wanted?
You did read it, right?

It definitely worked out for them, and that's fine.

The problem I have is the guys who act like CAL was the best airline all along. It's like none of us was around the industry from 1983-2000.:D

Well, for allot of folks CAL was their first choice airline. I only applied at one airline when I thought the time was right and for me it was CAL. I was treated and greeted very graciously on their jump seats and for that I was grateful. I thought the vision and energy of Gordon Bethune was contagious and it was allot of fun to be a part of a turn around. Allot of folks saw that UAL and CAL both had their share of scabs and that was sort of a "neutral offset." UAL was pushing hard for minority/females and so if you didn't fit that demographic you knew you should look elsewhere.

CAL was also attractive in the sense that if you looked at the ages (seniority age visualizer) you could predict that with modest growth one might be a Captain in 2 to 2.5 years. CAL had a unique age demographic with allot of senior bubba's and CAL was looking to backfill with youth. That was a combination of post Vietnam era hires and the older scabs that age 60 was mandating.

Meanwhile UAL had already hired a whole bunch of younger pilots in the mid 90's, so most folks thought a quicker upgrade would come at CAL. That has mostly been true to form, as most of the Captains at CAL lack grey hair or still have most of it left. Naturally, both airlines suffered the same setbacks post 9-11, albeit UAL suffered the most, and both pilot groups suffered the same setbacks in terms of upward mobility due to age 65.

I still think CAL was the better choice. Had friends hired at UAL around the same time and they didn't like it. It was fun, no HR boogie man in every room, good crews, Gordon had some hot girl friends, and we got for the most part prompt upgrades due to mandatory retirements.

Placing ANY UAL furloughed pilot behind a CAL furloughed pilot (based on the 2010 snapshot) is asinine.... then again, based on ALPA history... the guys on the bottom of the list don't really matter.

You my friend, said a mouthful! The guys on the bottom of the list don't really matter. It has been proven time and again, and perhaps is why the author of this post felt the need to vent. One day, we will be on top of the list. Will we dump on the youngsters, or will we not be so selfish? I hope to be in a different profession by then. Thank god my kids don't want to be airline pilots! What a shame.

I looked at CAL in 1995. I considered it a lateral move from being a Brasilia Captain.:eek:

Seriously...the pay was terrible, most of the Captains were Scabs (where at UAL they were a small minority), the training department was run by Scabs, the work rules were the worst in the industry, the domiciles were horrible, etc.

All my buds who ended up there wanted to be somewhere else first. To say that you saw CAL as the best choice is really...well...interesting.

It turned out well for you, but it was basically dumb luck rather than expert planning and insight.

UAL looked great (2.5 year upgrades, huge pension, industry leading work rules, great domiciles, new hires flying the 747, etc.). It ended up tanking pretty hard and disappointing us all.

It is what it is....I'm fine with moving on.

For all you who aren't happy, there may be an answer...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fllz3bSKTc...apa%2Blogo.gif

CAL in 1995 WAS ******, Bethune had just taken over and was trying to clean up the mess Ferguson had left him. I don't think they were even hiring in 1995 because they furloughed that summer, two years later it was a different company.

Wow....Gordo had hot girlfriends. Gee, sign me up.

When I was hired at UA, CO was a last resort.

FWIW, we have 2001 NWA pilots who were furloughed at one point sitting junior to DAL 2008 hires.

Yet again, this phrase comes true.

"The greater the risk, the greater the possible reward."

Can't argue with that.

Insofar, most of the guys feel they've been wronged. The arbitrators did their job so time to suck it up and get over it.

Or, cash out some lawyer in any number of stupid, futile lawsuits.

Cheers.

If someone is asking how furloughed United pilots got screwed, consider that our merger committee offered us up to be furloughed again ahead of CAL pilots that had weeks on the property even though many of were in seat for 6-7 years. They won't furlough unless it will be for a few years, so another one will cost each of us a half million dollars.

Well, in keeping with the theme of this thread ... You CHOSE United, so you will just have to suck it up if kicked in the nuts again ... Deal with it.

Now THAT is a legitimate gripe!

I called my reps and let them know how much that little policy ticked me off. I don't remember anyone giving ALPA direction to offer up our furloughees to be cast out again (in front of CAL guys).

They said that they were trying to get furloughed merged with active and it was something they had to do in order to appease the arbitrators.

I don't agree. Even if nobody gets furloughed in the next 5 years, seeing (in writing) that ALPA offered to throw you to the street first is extremely damaging. I would probably be out of ALPA at this point (if I was a UAL furloughee).

Once again....keep in mind that the rank and file UAL line pilot did not want to see this.

I don't recall reading the highlited part of your post. What's your reference? The furlough protection for CAL added by the arbitrators was not negotiated. The arbitrators felt it necessary to give the CAL types protection for a limited time while the UAL furloughed were moved into their rightful place on the senority list. The UAL Merger Committee did a good job and the abitrators were fair.

The UAL negotiating committee had this in their proposal to the arbitrators. You can check the transcripts from the hearings.

This was UAL's idea in order to make putting furloughed with active more appealing.

For OP, I feel your pain and are in the same shoes. Some things they have control over some they dont. Getting us integrated into the list is a "little help" (moved a 120ish numbers from staple) but benefited the entire UAL side.

The thing you have to remember is we of the 1436 are and have been negotiating pawns for Heppner. We'll see if they will now fix UPA LOA25 (The one that carves out our LUAL pay longevity). Now that damages are known, I will assume the lawsuit will be back if it isn't fixed internally.

The ISL is the list and we have to live with it. Keep your head up and remember there is more to life than this job.

dog

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.48692...5.1&H=90&W=160

Wise words, Grasshopper! Thanks for giving this idiotic forum perspective. The aura of an airline career is so far removed from what it once was I wonder who cares any more? It's no longer a career. We're simply widgets. Its just a job.

FUPM. Show me the money. :D

I've gone thru the transcripts a couple of time and still don't see a reference to the UAL side trading to get UAL furlough seniority for CAL furlough protection. Would you give me a direct reference to this please.

Its in the transcript I remember reading it, believe it was the last day of their evidence, and at the time it was thanks for another kick to the jimmy Heppner. I dont remember seeing anything that specifically stated it was to make UAL proposal a win-win for both sides. LUAL furlough=negotiation pawn

The exact words of "trading to get UAL furlough seniority" is not in there anywhere. But in the UAL conclusion report it is one of the their suggestions:
Fences, Furlough out of seniority order, etc.

I always thought that was a strange one to throw in there, but I would agree with the earlier poster that said it was something the UAL side felt they needed to do to get the UAL furloughed guys mixed with active employees. And the arbs must have agreed.

Agreed. The career changed to a job to a hobby that helps pays the bills. It would be cool if UAL had management that actually wanted to run a first class airline. Heck I would settle if they just followed Delta but they cant even do that right.

And it worked. Plus since we are hiring new pilots (Over 200 to date) they are all going to be furloughed first, so by the time the next downturn happens and they furlough 1,000 pilots, its likely no LUAL pilot will get furloughed.

I think they just looked at the growth and the number of retirements and made a smart decision to give up something that wasn't likely to have any real effect on the UAL pilots.

And for those pilots it paid off big time.

Also, think of it this way....

If those UAL pilots had been stapled THEY HAVE BEEN FURLOUGHED FIRST ANYWAY.

So They didn't give up ANYTHING. They just got integrated fairly.

Easy for you to say. I'm sure a Sept 1999 never thought they would get furloughed again in 2008.

If I was part of that group I would be upset with that clause.

Good Point and Post. David Watts is a CAL guys just stirring the UAL pot.

While I understand your frustration (a buddy of mine is in your same situation at UAL), the fact of the matter is that this "it's all about me, to hell with the other guy" attitude has been prevalent among airline pilots for decades now. Especially since the Me Generation (those pilots now hanging on 'til 65, while praying the retirement age gets raised again) succeeded the WWII and Korean War pilots who came before them.

And it has always been the most junior pilots who have gotten the short end of the stick. In good times and in bad.

Alas, it would appear from your post that the Entitlement Generation is not about to reverse that trend any time soon.

Maybe, but he is correct on this one.

Correction-UAL furloughees hired before April 2000 were integrated with active pilots. As a June 2000 hire, I was stapled below all active pilots, but still offered up as furlough fodder over the LCAL furloughees with whom I was integrated.

So what are you saying? Walk in with a proposal that stapled all CAL guys below the UAL guys. The arbitrators wouldn't have gone for that like they didn't go for the CAL's proposal. Not one UAL pilot wanted to see another UAL pilot furloughed and to imply the reverse is true does a disservice to all that have worked and sacrificed to help the furloughed. The UAL MEC has done a good job of representing the furloughed, especially during the SLI and should be commended for that work.

Let's put the ball in your court. What would you have done differently that would have carved out a better results for the furloughed in the SLI? Remember it would have to pass the smell test and approved by the three arbitrators.

You may not believe this, but the day will come when you will realize what an assine statement you just made.

The difference is, of course, the rest of us realize it now.

I have a ton of empathy for our twice furloughed brothers and sisters. I'm not sure what you think could have been done differently with regards to your position on the ISL, but I was frankly surprised and impressed with what the LUAL Merger Committee was able to pull off and the arbitrators approved.

That being said, your post is WAY out of line irregardless of the suffering of the past 10 years.

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.

Gee, why didn't I think of that... I should've just walked on down to FedEx or SWA and started ground school. :rolleyes:

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