Vacancy Bid
09-26-2013, 12:03 PM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by JohnHale
Just saw the wish list and I think a lot of guys will be bidding. I think a lot West coast and ORD guys will jump on the CAP777IAH and Displaced JFK and IAD guys will jump on the CAP777EWR. Plenty of Narrow body bids to go around. Good Luck - 3 years has been a long time.
737 Cap. Too bad I won't be holding any of these this time around. Oh well. Maybe i'll just bide my time as a 10% 737 FO DEN. Decisions. Decisions. Sled
Last edited by jsled; 09-26-2013 at 12:23 PM.
09-26-2013, 12:31 PM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by LAX Pilot
Wrong. All the growth the last 3 years was UAL growth. It was in ORD, DEN, LAX, and SFO. CAL didn't bring any growth. They just stole it from the UAL side.
09-26-2013, 12:37 PM
#73
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Originally Posted by jsled
The Sled is in the 80% in DEN,IAH,SFO. 70% LAX, and 50% ORD 737 Cap. Too bad I won't be holding any of these this time around. Oh well. Maybe i'll just bide my time as a 10% 737 FO DEN. Decisions. Decisions.
Sled
737 Cap. Too bad I won't be holding any of these this time around. Oh well. Maybe i'll just bide my time as a 10% 737 FO DEN. Decisions. Decisions. Sled
09-26-2013, 12:39 PM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
The Sled won't be enjoying those same Capt % after the fourth or fifth vacancy bid. Enjoy them while they last.
09-26-2013, 12:55 PM
#76
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by APC225
CAL brought the hours. They had to go somewhere. UAL real estate seemed the logical place. Now sUAL pilots can take advantage of the extra hours in those bases. Your complaint is?
Sled
09-26-2013, 01:20 PM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Originally Posted by IAHB756
It is nice to see some happy s-UA pilots for a change. Even if it is at my expense (05 737 CA). I'm serious
09-26-2013, 07:07 PM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 168
Originally Posted by Skyflyin
You may like to repeat that ST, but what the CAL MC proposed was exactly what was awarded in the Delta/NWA merger and not very far from the UAL proposal (below).
The UAL Committee’s pilots in training proposed C&R (Number 1.3) is as
follows:
Pilots who, at the time of implementation of an integrated seniority list, are in the process of completing or who have completed qualification training for a new position
(e.g., B-777 Captain or A-319 First Officer) may be assigned to the position for which they are being or have been trained, regardless of their relative standing on the Integrated
Seniority List.
I was surprised that the arbs did not define what "in the process of training" meant, just for the reason that the two sides seem to be arguing now.
Besides, I wasn't talking about the 14-02 guys, but the guys that would be bumped that are already in the position.
The UAL Committee’s pilots in training proposed C&R (Number 1.3) is as
follows:
Pilots who, at the time of implementation of an integrated seniority list, are in the process of completing or who have completed qualification training for a new position
(e.g., B-777 Captain or A-319 First Officer) may be assigned to the position for which they are being or have been trained, regardless of their relative standing on the Integrated
Seniority List.
I was surprised that the arbs did not define what "in the process of training" meant, just for the reason that the two sides seem to be arguing now.
Besides, I wasn't talking about the 14-02 guys, but the guys that would be bumped that are already in the position.
I thought I'd run this by you and let you punch holes in it. Just curious about your opinion and how you would continue to justify that "in the process of training" is vague.
Thanks,
Birddog,
I've pasted the C&R Qualification Training C&R discussion below because the Arbitrators words explain it best:
F. CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
Our review of many prior ISL arbitration decisions teaches that elaborate conditions and restrictions unduly complicate implementation of an Integrated Seniority List. The interminable disputes they generate tend to breed animosity that corrodes flight crew relations. Our Award seeks to achieve its goals of fairness and equity primarily through the construction and creation of the ISL itself, while awarding only standard and necessary conditions and restrictions of limited reach and duration.
In most respects, the competing Conditions and Restrictions proposed by the respective Committees covered traditional common ground and mutually satisfied the fair and equitable standards of Merger Policy. In constructing our conditions and restrictions, we selected what we deemed to be the best of each and made minimal adjustments. But it is necessary that we address and resolve three points of controversy in those common subject matter proposals.
1. “Qualification Training”
The UAL Committee’s pilots in training proposed C&R (Number 1.3) is as follows:
Pilots who, at the time of implementation of an integrated seniority list, are in the process of completing or who have completed qualification training for a new position (e.g., B-777 Captain or A-319 First Officer) may be assigned to the position for which they are being or have been trained, regardless of their relative standing on the Integrated Seniority List.
Two of the CAL Committee's proposed C&Rs address pilots in training:
Neither the implementation of the ISL nor the Implementation or expiration of a condition or restriction herein, in and of itself, shall cause the displacement of any pilot from his or her then-current position (including a pilot who has been awarded a position but has not commenced or completed training).
Pilots who, at the time of implementation of the ISL, are in the process of completing or who have completed qualification training for a new position (e.g., B-777 Captain or A41 320 First Officer) may be assigned to the position for which they are being or have been trained, regardless of their relative standing on the ISL. Pilots awarded new positions shall be considered as “in the process of completing . . . qualification training for a new position”, within the meaning of this provision, unless and until they have cancelled their bids for the new positions, withdrawn from training, failed the training without further recourse to further training, or successfully completed the training.
The CAL Committee’s training protection proposals include “a pilot who has been awarded a position but has not commenced or completed training.” (Emphasis added). That expanded definition would have the Board sweep into protective coverage some 400 CAL pilots awarded tentative February 2014 positions in the January 2013 CAL Bid 14-02. As of the close of these arbitration hearings, many of those individuals had not even been awarded a training date, let alone begun training. Moreover, treating them as “currently in” those positions or “in the process of completing training” would unilaterally rewrite language mutually agreed to by the CAL pilots, the UAL pilots and the Company (See TPA Section 5-B. Acceptance of the Integrated Seniority List, in Appendix 1).
There simply is no fair and equitable basis for this Board to award what the CAL Committee proposes. Under the guise of protecting pilots from displacement from “then-current positions”, it would extend such protection to pilots who don’t actually have such positions at all. In short, if granted, it would interfere with the fair operation of the ISL forever by placing CAL pilots immovably in positions that their ISL seniority would not entitle them to hold. For all of those reasons, this Board did not adopt the CAL Committees' proposed C&R Numbers 1(b) and 1(c).
Look at the sentence in S-CAL’s second C&R proposal from above--- Pilots awarded new positions shall be considered as “in the process of completing . . . qualification training for a new position”, within the meaning of this provision. This was the S-CAL Merger Committee’s(MC) attempt to have the SLI arbitration panel protect the Bid 14-02 pilots allowing them to keep their awards and not cancel the awards once the SLI A&O was delivered. But this attempt also establishes another point. Clearly the S-CAL MC understands that pilots “awarded” new positions are not “in the process of completing…Qualification Training for a new position”. Why else would they attempt to alter the language of the C&R? This solidifies the fact if a pilot only been awarded a position, the pilot is not in the process of completing Qualification Training and their training must be cancelled unless the cancellation bears undue cost upon the company. The Arbiters even state above to treat these pilots as ““in the process of completing training” would unilaterally rewrite language mutually agreed to by the CAL pilots, the UAL pilots AND the company”. The Arbiters also say that to protect these pilots would “interfere with the fair operation of the ISL forever by placing CAL pilots immovably in positions that their ISL seniority would not entitle them to hold”. While these pilots “are displaced”, the Arbiters granted them “no displacement rights”. And as we saw above the ISL prevails over the SFO MOU and the UPA Chapter 8 is not in effect yet. There are NO displacement rights for the Bid 14-02 pilots whose training is cancelled.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
