They won't listen to you but nice try, some of these guys STILL think you took their money :confused:

I agreed with almost all of your post, but chose to interject a few times to shed some additional light for those who can't seem to connect the dots.

Perhaps we ought to wait and see what happens in the next part of the grievance. How will you feel if it is determined that the profit sharing pool was diluted as a result of the 40M?

The reason most UA types are torqued is that while the profit from one year to the next was essentially unchanged, we got significantly less money from the company. At least, that's the prevailing view. I am anxious to see how this all plays out.

Did you find that ALPA pin under the mattress in that fine motel you were staying?

?? You have no problem TAKING something you aren't entitled to, but will draw the line at the company getting something for 'free'? What kind of moral base do you have?

Chris,
The entire SLI is LUAL pilots getting something they are not entitled to but I don't see you or anyone else advocating to give it back. Yes, continue to grab your seniority and hide behind "ALPA Merger Policy".

Funny, but incorrect.

Even with all the games your side played in the three years prior to ISL, the outrageous proposed ISL, and the packing of training bids prior to ISL (read loss of bidding power/$ I should have IAW the ISL) I still have some compassion for what your junior pilots are feeling right now.

No matter how loudly and often you state that we aren't entitled to our arbitrated seniority, the facts won't change. We ARE entitled to the seniority laid out in the EKN award. That ENTIRE SLI process was conducted transparently, IAW established agreements and law, and with both sides having the opportunity to make their best case. Mind you, I'm talking process - not the conduct of the Legacy merger committees. The exact opposite is true when it comes to the profit sharing/767-200 grievance settlement debacle.

I 'hide behind' merger policy just like I 'hide behind' the Annotated Code of North Carolina, the United States Code, the JCBA, etc...

A lot of introspection would help you guys.

No, we are entitled to get something for sure. The company violated our contract and this was the settlement. The arbitrator did not rule on the 767 grevence only that your side should have been included in the remedy. I know you did not care about the CAL CBA being walked all over but we did. I hope you guys can get something for the company selling our aircraft but to be sure these were CAL A/C that were flowen by CAL pilots that the company violated our contract by selling so yes I feel I should get something.

I am having a flashback to a typical commute of mine back in 2005:

Buckling into yet another RJ jumpseat for a ride to work at UAL. No more mainline of course. The captain and F/O are quite young, which is typical. The growth at the regionals, as we all know, has caused many of these young pilots to find jet jobs shortly after getting their aviation degrees. Meanwhile, mainline pilots are on the streets. Luckily for me, I have managed to avoid furlough and have even managed to avoid being on reserve during the cutbacks.

How could I have imagined sitting on that jumpseat back then that the young captain would, 8 years later, be furious about me being senior to him at --- United Airlines? In his view, I should have been stapled to the bottom along with all the post 1996 L-UAL hires. When that didn't happen after going through federal arbitration, he now supports a lawsuit because he refuses to accept the result. ALPA pin in the trash.

Buh-loney.

Most LUAL pilots lost seniority. CAL pilots with only 5 years seniority made senior to UAL pilots with 12 years seniority.

I know you want to count the 2013 list percentage as your benchmark, but that's just a failed argument no one bought. LUAL pilots sat patiently and waited while LCAL pilots came into our bases and took our Captain positions, but now that the flying has been so co-mingled its all UAL flying, you are in uproar.

How are United pilots bidding to fly United airplanes in United bases, something we "aren't entitled to"?

Not only is that not true -- it is the EXACT OPPOSITE of the truth.

We didn't want nor ask for anything from your grievance.

Are you refusing to understand the facts on purpose?

This is exactly the truth!! You like to spread lies and half truths.
You asked for immediate pay raises. Are you saying that the ps was not given to settle a grievance? Are you always this rude?

We didn't ask for immediate pay raises. We asked for pay raises is the JCBA wasn't completed by a certain date. The grievance was used a the 'cover' for giving you PS. The arbitrator already ruled that it shouldn't have been done. Telling the truth isn't rude. It seems rude when the other person doesn't want to understand the facts. Why are you so defensive about how the PS/grievance deal went down? An arbitrator already said is was a bad deal that shouldn't have been made - he was very clear. You get to keep your money. Why are you so personally wrapped up in this?

Where did the arbitrator say the grievance was a cover? He said you should have been included in the negotiations but not that the grievance was not legit. The grievance was legit, we were harmed. The company settled, you guys tried to latch on to gain as well. Why do you think the company was so anxious to "give" away 40 million?

I am not defensive at all nor am I wrapped up in this anywhere near what you are. Look at how many posts you have about this on here vs ANYONE else, not to mention the several other sites you are spreading you venom for the sake of unity.

This is what the arbitrator had to say on in the award stage. When he talks about the companies actions, he's referring to the company and LCAL. The grievance is against the company so that's all he addresses.

LCAL started negotiating properly. They later decided that they couldn't risk not getting the PS and the LUAL negotiation 'wants' were seen as an obstacle. Instead of staying in the boundaries they engaged the company to find another way to get PS. They both agreed (this agreement is what the arbitrator is talking about) to grant PS in exchange for the 767-200 grievance. That agreement was prohibited and wrong. I'm not commenting on the merits of the 767-200 grievance. Since you're obviously on the 'other' forum you know that I've posted facts about that grievance and have stated that you had a valid grievance. It all went wrong when LCAL called an audible in the middle of negotiations and negotiated outside the confines of the collective bargaining process. Given the facts and the arbitrators crystal clear decision(s) that shouldn't be hard to admit. Your 767-200 grievance should've continued on it's separate path.

Parden me, but if the flying you ascribe to above was "your flying, your captain's seats" , then why wasn't L-UAL crews doing that flying with L-UAL metal? And don't blow the virtual merger smoke/crap ... Absent the change in merger policy, IF the 3 panel arbs had based the award on the past 20 years of merger/integration precedent, this SLI would have been a straight Cat/Status ratio based on the lists as of MCD .... how any L-UAL guy can't understand this is almost beyond some of the arrogance many on this forum exhibit ... Your group gained at the expense of the L-Cal group, thanks to the change in merger policy ... Your own MC/MEC said it best: "unprecedented".

True unity will not be found until the majority of the L-UAL group accepts the windfall as such, with a measure of gratitude.

What do you mean by straight 'cat/status'? Are suggesting that it would've been done with no consideration for aircraft size or type? If so, I vehemently disagree...but that horse has long since been beaten to death.

One more question. Do you assert that 'unprecedented' equals 'wrong'?

Recently finished flying a four day with CALWonderCapt..... nice guy. In fact all the CAL guys are nice... this guy was educated, accomplished, successful.

He claims he lost 15-30% (dependent on how many drinks) seniority. I went to the SLI Dispute page on the MEC Website, downloaded the CAL seniority list and compared it to the SLI... he gained about 1.5%. I sure would like to know what seniority list the CAL pilots are using to show how screwed they got... Can anyone link it or describe where they got it? When the CAL guys talk about getting screwed, they are right.....

Continued discussion just turns into rhetoric and baseless comments. I heard 'I don't know' too many times from pressing questions. Conspiracy theories were not excluded. It is interesting that I haven't found one CAL pilot that approves of CAL ALPA or Jay P(os). Jay Pierce is really persona non grata. To accept him as one of us, is disgusting.

I think the real issue is, the CAL guys were really done a disservice over the years. The scabs really screwed them over with the pilot culture, being managements lapdogs since '83. This continued on with the IACP and CAL ALPA... management basically was the union and therefore the pilots. CAL pilots have been trained to be dollar hungry... don't ask questions, how about 150%? It's hard to be a real professional union pilot when the scab force and the dollar hoes are ubiquitous.
Thus, when the interactions between the two pilot groups began, the incompetence and ignorance of the CAL pilots was apparent. Still is. The CAL pilot attitudes, even today, on this thread, are about ego defense. Certainly not facts. (not that the UAL pilots/union is all things wonderful, but the competence level is stark)

While I've had CAL pilots tell me to my face.. "sorry, UAL furlough time means nothing, they deserve nothing" ... ( translation, "F you....." ) in fact it does mean something. And ALPA merger policy that CAL pilots agreed to, says it does. Just because you think merger policy sucks, doesn't mean you got screwed. And the list goes on.. but how can you expect a pilot group that was marginalized, scab lovers and thrown some dollars to suddenly be an engaged, mature reasonable agents in this whole process?

Look at the PS award. You'd like to think there would be some humility. There won't be. Insecurity, denial and ego defense are human nature characteristics... I've already heard comments that CAL pilots deserve the PS and they will never wear their pin... How long will that last? Look at the East Airways pilots. So much money left on the table.... they rather be stupid and poor. Ego is powerful.

If CAL pilots choose to be slick ties, marginalized and ignorant, that is their choice. Some CAL pilots won't. Most UAL pilots won't either... the new United pilots despite their legacy background, who choose to engage as active agents in their union will be more successful.

The CAL pilots got screwed.... by themselves... and its easier, more comfortable, to make the UAL guys the scapegoat, than look in the mirror and admit incompetence and ignorance.

If the 05-07 CAL wonderkids, the future gen, choose to be slick ties, and not represent themselves, they will be screwed over the course of their career. Not intentionally, but if they refuse to engage in union affairs to represent themselves, they shouldn't expect much. But I am sure we'll hear from them.... like chainsaws for the next 30 years.

Ok, Thank You! Now, move to the back of the list/line where your belong. Don't just turn your ALPA up-side down - don't wear it so we can give you a proper salute for your work toward UNITY.

Snarge, you coulda just said "****** you, CAL pilots" and saved a lot of typing.
Moving on.

You state that all the cal guys are nice, educated, and accomplished and you are more than happy to spend a few hours at the bar with them. Then you turn around and refer to them in a derogatory fashion as "CALWonderCapt."

I believe the ones you speak of are ALPA members in good standing that never crossed a picket line. No job was stolen. In two years, this post isl imbalance will begin to level. I think it's time for you to move on.

I am trying to move on.. the fight is out there, but when the CAL guys insist that the ISL in a UAL windfall, pout, say FU after the PS grievance and continue to insist on lies, misinformation and no unity... I had to do the lengthy amateur psych eval....

Not sure it was derogatory... why do you think it is... because the whole time I am listening to this guy contradict himself I am Wonder-ing....

Can't you guys accept negative criticism... even if it is true? To me that would be a sign of... maturity. Or should nothing be said and we still have to listen to how crappy the UAL guys are for 'doing this' to the CAL guys...


As I mentioned... I am trying to move on... the CAL guys have emotional baggage... and won't let it go... it's not going to change... yet the only thing that can change is CAL attitudes...

The fact is the UAL guys are more engaged in union affairs and they will stay engaged... Don't be surprised if CAL apathy puts themselves in a place they don't want to be... I've given up on the 97 hires... they won't be around too long... The MEC (both CAL and UAL) are trying to get the 05-07 guys on board... so we can work together.. against... management....

But at some point, I will move on .... without them, if all they can talk about it is misinformation, lies, divisiveness and how they got screwed by UAL guys, which isn't true... at some point I'll stop trying to unify and if they don't represent themselves they will continue to screw themselves..

Your amateur psych skills suck when you belittle the entire CAL group with words like "dollar hoes", "incompetence and ignorance", "expect them to be mature, reasonable agents"....

I get what you're saying, but the way you're (constantly) saying it turns the middle of the road folks off. You're posting history here is not one of of an interested objective reporter. You have been one of the most vocal and stridently pithy anti-cal broad-brushed painting posters since taking the CAL job position. While that has given you a unique insight into both operations, the incessant noise and subjective group condemnation overpowers the message.

We do need to come together, but posts like yours are not the way to do it.

I don't think its that.

The word I would use is "co-mingling".

That's what happened in 2010. The resources of each legacy started to become "co-mingled" at that time.

At that point, we should have had a single seniority list. But we didn't. It took three years, and during that time, the company made a decision to alter flying in a way that drastically and unproportionally shifted new flying to one side.

That gave a false sense of "seniority" and "growth" from 2010-2013. The arbitrators validated that.

Despite your beliefs, if someone is quoting their "2013 CAL list" position, relative percentage, or "what they could hold" its all a moot point. Lots of senior LCAL guys didn't take those upgrades, because they wanted to wait to see what was going to happen with SLI. 2006 hires getting guppy Captain positions in LAX, ORD, and DEN would have never happened with an integrated seniority list, and would have never happened without the merger. The pilots leaving EWR and IAH to take those new positions out west created what appeared to be growth in those bases, but it wasn't. Just backfilling of slots that wouldn't have been vacated without the merger.

I don't really know who the merger benefitted more, and I don't really care. I personally have no desire to ever be based in IAH, CLE, EWR, or GUM since each is over 1,000 miles from where I live. My base has had about 400 new pilots that weren't here previously come into it. All I care about is my base, and while others have had tremendous new opportunity here, I have not.

Once the assets because co-mingled, even though we had separate seniority lists, we should have shared in the benefits of the merger, but we didn't. Management made the decision to shift flying this way, and look at the mess they left for us to clean up.

The SLI just cleaned that up as best possible.

Anyway, that's my rant. Enjoy your day.

I've yet to see the middle of the road CAL guys be the voice of reason to the slick tie CAL types.... not gonna happen? Because when the UAL guys do it, it is divisive.

Ok lCAL pilots, you got over on us with the profit sharing thing. rationalize it however you want but you got handed a bunch of money you were not contractually entitled - you got over. In the interest of unity, I am not responding to this thread again. Fraternally

The MEC (both CAL and UAL) are trying to get the 05-07 guys on board... so we can work together.. against... management....


Now this is interesting an statement. I'm one of these 05-07 guys that you mention.
I have a question...is there a management team on planet earth that LUAL would like to have? I don't know the history of United as well as many of you but I know you all didn't like your recent management. Who do you like? Will you ALWAYS hate management? I fly with guys who liked Gordon and some who didn't. But it seems you guys hated EVERYONE. Please tell me if I'm wrong because I genuinely don't know. Who was LUAL last great management team?

Pat Patterson

Ok....Just looked him up....

Have you liked anyone not born in the 1800's?

The legacy United pilot side difference wasn't management. It was the pilot group, including the mid level pilot managers that made being a United pilot enjoyable... respectable.... professional.

You've heard it before, from the new hire treatment at United (wing ceremonies at a company paid dinner) to nice aircraft pictures and coffee table book for retirement. You know the CAL experience so I won't detail it. But it was the pilots, not management, that made the pilot experience at United what it was... IOW, screw management, we don't want or need them to define us, (they will fund it though :) )

I can go into any legacy united chief pilot office and talk about scabs, ALPA, the profession, etc....( I got my scab clicker in ops.)
I am not comfortable doing that on the CAL side..


The pilots on the United side made the job/career what it was... we all engaged in the process... and if guys weren't actually doing union work, you knew they supported the guys who did....

Sure there were problems... the internal political fighting on the U-MEC was complex, nasty and counter-productive.



So I guess, the question becomes... what do you want?

I'd be glad if the 97 hires, NY Air, and PE guys would get on board, but my focus is the 05-07 hires. Let's see if the following can stick or degenerate into another ****ing contest.

The CAL MEC/NC/Merger committee did a poor job.
CAL pilot expectations were poorly managed.
Compare your MAD 2010 Seniority list to the ISL.
Read, actually read, the ISL opinion and award.
Accept that CAL pilots accepted ALPA merger policy and it was applied fairly.
There are no conspiracies or back room deals.
The chances or decertifying ALPA or overturning the ISL are low and highly expensive.

Reconcile all of this.... close the history book... Look forward.
I can type for hours how management has and will continue to divide us....

By now the CAL guys know that not wearing your pin is a hard core FU to every United pilot. What do you hope to gain in the long run?

With all pilots on board, sans scabs, we can do two things:

Get the best contract we deserve.
Create the best pilot culture and profession in the world. Yeah, I just said that... the World.

The choice is each individual pilots.... get engaged and unified, or get divided and owned. What do you want?

No broad brushes, accusations or attempts to characterize over 4000 other pilots.
Can you please explain how the words "windfall", "gratitude" and "gained" can be used in the context of losing almost eight years of seniority to hundreds of younger pilots?
The SLI is a fait acompli, I don't dispute that. Exactly how you were harmed by it?

This is where the water gets muddy. If all of agree to the ALPA merger policy, then we must agree that seniority is based on several factors, it is not simply DOH, or CAT/Status. If you agree with this policy then to say that you lost 8 years of seniority is simply untrue. Placing a pilot hired at CAL in 2005 above a UAL 1998 hire doesn't cause that UAL pilot lose seniority any more than it causes a CAL pilot to gain seniority.

Just like a person's "relative percentage" changing does not mean they lost seniority.

Your idea of entitlement was your MECs proposal to put 3000 LUAL pilots at the bottom of the seniority list? Sorry you can't have everything you want in life.

How exactly was SLI not fair exactly?

Correct. The difference being that if a pilot did, in fact, sit lower on a relative percentage post SLI, then to say that they lost relative percentage is a valid observation. The same can be said for the 1998 hire at UAL who is behind the CAL 2005 hire. The UAL pilot can make the point that he is junior to a pilot hired at 2005 at CAL. That pilot cannot, however, make the claim that they lost 8 years seniority.

You rehashed the ALPA merger policy and I'm not disputing it. My opinion (& yours) of it is irrelevant. I am trying to understand how any LCAL person could feel they were harmed by the SLI and make the previous poster explain why he thinks every LUA person gained something and why we should all be grateful to to LCAL pilots for giving something to us. I know it sounds silly, but that was the tone of the post to which I originally responded.

Not really. Seems competent airline management world wide is in short supply.

Many of today's managers are competent beancounters, but don't know beans about leadership. CEOs like Patterson, Woolman, Kelleher, etc. are indeed in short supply, and I'm not sure that Wall Street even wants such people running airlines today. :(

You guys do know the SLI has been done. The only good to come of the recent CAL lawsuit is the judge overturning the awards and then we do it by DOH. Fixes everything.