I was hired in 1997. 16 years. Never furloughed. Yet, I was placed behind quite a few 2005 hires. Sounds like a WINDFALL for those guys, wouldn't you say?

Unlike some, I have the character and integrity to accept something that I agreed to accept before the decision was rendered.

It's time to move on and look forward. I have...suggest you do the same.

 

Enjoy the gift???? you have been drinking the Kool-Aid served by your negotiating team. The true gift in this whole situation has been all the bids that the CAL side has had for the last 3+ years. Do you really think that aircraft orders create jobs? Getting narrowbodies (whether Airbus or Boeing) would not be an issue for an airline the size of ours (whether we merged with CAL or US). Heck even the vaunted 787 is available. Norwegian airlines just took delivery of their first one and they didn't have any orders for the aircraft until well after Sub UA had the orders.

Where did those jobs come from that you have been the beneficiary of bidding on since the merger? Let’s look at the flying.

In late April of this year I pulled down the entire flight schedule for a day (a Monday) and looked at all the narrow body flying being done of the non-augmented type. (nothing like the opening presentation by the CAL Negotiating Team to motivate me) All of the below information is taken straight from the actual schedule in the computer. If you have some time on your hand you can update it for Sept info by using the FL feature in Unimatic. All CAL and UA flights are available.

What I was interested in was the "shift" in flying between the subsidiaries. IE how much flying was Sub-UA doing on Legacy CAL routes (IAH-EWR for instance) and how much flying was Sub-CAL doing on Legacy UA routes (ORD-SFO for instance) Figuring that without this merger I had no expectation to fly IAH-EWR (or similar flights out of IAH) and the CAL folks had no expectation to fly ORD-SFO. (or similar flights out of ORD)

Here is what it showed

(737 and 757) CAL flying out of:
ORD 340 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
IAD 185 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
DEN 200 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
SFO 350 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
LAX 263 hours a day (arrivals and departures)

(319, 320, 757) UAL flying out of:
IAH 432 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
EWR 249 hours a day (arrivals and departures)
CLE 49 hours a day (arrivals and departures)

When you subtract the flying that UA is doing on CAL routes from the flying that CAL is doing on UA routes you end up with a net benefit to the CAL side of over 600 hours per day!!!!

At 10.5 hours per airplane per day that is 57 airplanes worth of flying!!!!!
at 7 crews per airlplane (a fairly good ballpark for unaugmented manpower planning) that is 400 Captains and 400 First Officers

All of those positions have been filled by Legacy CAL pilots but are being flown on the Legacy United Routes.

The bigger issue is that the airline has not grown by a net of 57 narrowbody airplanes! The actaul net growth is down around 30ish airplanes. So, the 10% downsizing of IAH, that was inevitable based on the economics- see Smisek's comments, has been more than compensated by the available growth on the legacy UAL routes.

The shift in Widebody/Augmented flying back in April was about 80 hours per day in favor of the UA pilots (opposite of the narrowbody). That has dwindled to almost nothing now that the 787 is flying internationally. DEN-NRT, LAX-NRT, LAX-PVG. Additionally virtually all of the growth on the Widebody/augmented CAL routes has been due to UA Slots/Star Alliance slots that most certainly wouldn't have happened without the merger. CAL has gone to 8 Arrivals/Departures a day in/out of LHR, when they were at 3 prior to the merger. They have also increased frequencies to FRA. Even giving CAL the full benefit for those routes, we are now at a virtual "push" on Widebody/augmented flying benefity but you still have the huge benefit that the CAL side has by flying the narrowbody UA routes.


So, while the hours being flown on the UA route system have grown more than enough to have brought all of our furloughed pilots back by now, the reduced hours being flown on the CAL route system has delayed their return. If the merger between CAL and UA had not happened, UA would have merged with US and all of those routes that are being flown today would still be flown. They would just have been available for the UA and US pilots to bid on and not the CAL pilots. The UA furloughed pilots would have all been offered recall long ago to staff that flying. CAL on the other hand would have had just the CAL route system available. As the last 3.5 years have shown, the CAL route system was beyond saturated. (again see Smisek’s comments about the need to shrink IAH by 10% due to so many flights operating at a loss) So, without this merger and the associated access to the UA routes, the bottom of the CAL list was much more likely to be on furlough than anybody on the UA list.

So, the gifts in this process have been the bids that have been handed out to the CAL pilots over the last 3.5 years that are completely due to the UA routes



So, while everyone can argue about career expectations and whether or not the junior guys at CAL are getting a raw deal, keep in mind that what has ACTUALLY happened with the flying supports the argument that UA had a huge potential for growth in their jobs, while CAL did not.

The ISL is done and I don't expect anybody to be happy about it, but using what has happened with bids since the merger started to justify anything (or declare it a windfall or gift) is absolutely ridiculous. Who got the bids is not in dispute, Where the jobs came from that created the need for the bids is what matters. What has happened with the actual flying tells much more about what the career expectations (including furloughees) were of the two parties and where the job creation of the last 3 plus years really came from.

 

Not that is matters since the arbs ruled we have to share, but ...so because you used to do the flying, and since UAL bought CAL, then that means that any jobs added post MAD or MCD were yours? Then why didn't those jobs go to s-UAL?

As for the windfall, the comment was meant as a direct reflection on the placement of the UAL furloughed pilots, which subsequently lifts everyone on the UAL list up relative to CAL pilots ... rarely, extremely rarely has what was done in this award been done in the past w/regards to the UAL furloughed pilots; from that perspective, this is a huge windfall, enabled by ALPA merger policy, delivered by the arbs, and paid for with CAL seniority. And not even a thank you

 

WOW. You are going to be ok. Just breathe slowly and calm down. We have extablished that your are a 2007 hire and were on furlough when the merger was announced. Correct? RTF policy. Longevity matters. So does Category and Status. 35% / 65% in this case. (BTW, the Category and Status would put a serious damper on the hypothetical RJ merger you elluded to earlier.) You had little longevity and NO Category and Status. That is why you are in the bottom 6% of the pre-merger pilots. I am sorry that your MC' proposal put you ahead of UAL pilots with 13 years continuous longevity. But that was fantasy land looney tunes. I told you it would be "chucked in the can". (my exact words). Let's just move on. Can't we all get along?

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ua...ml#post1449344

Sled

 

The windfall comment is what I was talking about. You look at it as a windfall for the UA pilots because you believe that where you are in 2013 is where you would have been without this merger. I think that is pure fantasy. Fortunately for me, what has ACTUALLY happened with the flying supports my point of view.

Without this merger the furloughed United pilots would all be back working at United (albeit a merged UA / US)

Without this merger the CAL flying would be lower than it was pre-merger and likely CAL pilots would be on furlough.

So, the real windfall of this whole process is the 3.5 years of bidding the CAL pilots have received to fly airplanes on routes they never would have flown had it not been for this merger.

The ISL is done and now we have to move forward, which I am going to do, but to describe the results as a windfall for the UA furloughees, denies the underlying reasons for everything that happened up to the point that the ISL was announced.

 

-----------

 

Hey L-CAL guys, the L-UAL guys are absolutely correct!

Listen to the wisdom they bestow upon us.

The orders at CAL meant nothing without United and actually, as a matter of fact, the delays to the Boeing 787 weren't due to manufacturing and design flaws, they were delayed waiting for CAL to merge with United, otherwise CAL would have no place to fly, just big airplanes with all the routes in the world clean and dried up.

Without UAL, all those orders at CAL would be delivered and immediately parked on the ramp waiting for a big bad JUMBO airline to merge with us so we'd have somewhere to fly. Without a big jumbo airline, an airline can't grow; that's impossible!

I guess CAL had no chance at new routes anywhere or expansion in order to compete with the other legacy carriers out there. Our CEO said that the merger was absolutely necessary, and I'm pretty sure he gave up a whole lot of his pay and benefits just to ensure the survivability of both airlines.

This is why SWA, JetBlue, Alaska and Spirit have all gone bankrupt in the last few years. All the flying was eaten up by big mother United and there was none left.

It's a good thing United bought CAL when they did, because, even though USAir, who was doing worse than CAL prior to the merger, is making record profits, there was no possibility whatsoever that CAL could have made it on it's own. Just because CAL was the only legacy to make a profit since the industry crashed after 9/11 doesn't mean that they had a good business model.

Oh, and another point, UAL was "right sized" for the merger. It doesn't matter that UAL was 30% bigger than CAL, it's normal for the big company to change their operations to conform to those of the little company when a merger occurs when the big company is healthy. I'm sure if T-mobile had been allowed to merge with AT&T a few years ago, T-mobile's management would have taken over to make sure AT&T knew what they were doing. That was the plan, right?

I feel nauseous...

 

Wow, Zoomie, can you whine a bit more? Here's a newsflash.....it's over move along. You must have been a real treat as a 3 degree at the zoo.

 

Zoomie,

I applaud individuals like GoCats who have taken time to use facts and figures to bolster their argument. Your statement above is a retort with no factual basis. You say you disagree, but you use only your opinions and sarcasm as evidence. You draw enormous analogies between Alaska and Continental as stand alone operations but you offer zero analysis as to how they may or may not be similar and what that MIGHT imply about Continental IF it had remained independent. In short, you take the easy way out and take no time at all to study the facts as they exist. Doesn't that bother you even the slightest?

How many planes did Continental have on order in April of 2010? What was the growth plan outlined in the 2009 Annual report? Was growth above 2 or 3% ever mentioned? Did the growth plans change between 2007 and 2009? What was the Global Aviation Industry outlook in 2009?

Do you honestly believe that Continental was going to grow regardless of industry trends? Do you really believe that United was never going to grow under any circumstances? Do you really believe that the Delta/Northwest merger allowed for smaller legacy carriers to effectively grow 10% or more from 2010 to 2013?

Nobody at United is saying that Continental wasn't a great company and a good partner; what every United pilot wants, I think, is a little respect for what we brought to the table namely a strong global route structure and a fleet of large aircraft doing long haul efficient flying that we all get to share in not to mention the increased feed opportunities we gain from joining forces.

Also, the boys at USA kicked ALPA out because they felt wronged and in response ALPA rewrote the merger policy to include the word "longevity". Not United pilots - ALPA. We didn't get a windfall; we got what current ALPA merger policy dictates.

 

The question was why did UCH create jobs at s-CAL and not s-UAL ... Again, that doesn't matter because the arbs dictated that we in effect share everything post MAD. I have made ZERO reference to relative position pre and/or post merger, nor made any comment w/reference to the fairness or equitability of the award. Simply, in reference to hundreds of arbitrations of the past decades, rarely, almost never, have active pilots been integrated above or with active pilots ... your own MC/MEC characterized the award as "unprecedented" ... any equity advantage a CAL guy had at MAD was taken and given to the UAL guys to pay for this "unprecedented" award ... call it what ever you want, but history clearly shows the UAL furloughed pilots were treated way differently than almost everyone of their predecessors in ALPA history.