Airline Pilot Central Forums - Baghdad Bob "Attrition is the Answer"

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

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

- - Baghdad Bob "Attrition is the Answer" (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/82860-baghdad-bob-attrition-answer.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Birddog (Post 1872374)

Hearing that Houston Council 171 is crafting a displacement resolution to help mitigate the effects of planned displacements there.

Yeah? I'm still waiting for the C33 resolution from our displacements last summer, and apparently this coming summer. And the council 27 resolution. And council 12.....

BUT but but but Ben,

You promised your guys that the L-CAL SLI proposal was in the bag! Whaaa happen?

Depending on what it is... Two year grandfather, unlimited grandfather, etc. I wouldn't count it out at the MEC level necessarily. The deal making and horse trading there is legend.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sovt (Post 1872417)

Or the out of seniority recall of furloughees that were employed by L-CAL. But heck, it's ok when it advantages the L-UAL group.

ALPA brothers?

The offer of employment at LCAL to LUAL furloughees was in seniority order. My class was fairly evenly grouped except for a few more senior pilots who delayed accepting the offer. That was the typical class makeup for classes before and after me.

All LUAL furloughees were offered employment at LCAL and then new hiring started before the SLI. Everything was above board.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probe (Post 1872421)

I don't remember DEN or ORD LEC's trying to negotiate a carve out when their pilots were displaced.

Maybe those reps don't have a heightened sense of over entitlement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Birddog (Post 1872503)

Depending on what it is... Two year grandfather, unlimited grandfather, etc. I wouldn't count it out at the MEC level necessarily. The deal making and horse trading there is legend.

The deal making may be legendary but I don't think the MEC will agree to a carve-out for a "special" group at the expense of the entire group.

If the "Houston carve-out" has grandfather rights, we should also expect to see the same rights granted to all bumps and base closings going forward. Maybe even make it retroactive to all past bumps and base closings since merger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenAllert (Post 1872539)

We live in a seniority based system. If they have the seniority when new bids come out, they should be able to bid it. If they don't, too bad. Just like every other surplus (ORD, DEN, LAX, SEA) in the last 2 years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer (Post 1872551)

I agree, this is why it's important that the MEC not allow the "Houston carve-out".

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenAllert (Post 1872558)

I agree, this is why it's important that the MEC not allow the "Houston carve-out".

So they sell it as a retroactive, system-wide blanket policy going forward. Make it an LOA. It could be sold that way to the MEC. The reality is a grandfather policy, such as for two years, would likely only benefit the 200 737 CAs in IAH. So it would be a defacto carve out. But spin is spin. The company doesn't care as long as it costs them nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Birddog (Post 1872568)

It doesn't matter that the company doesn't care. The pilots on the United seniority list cares that the Houston LEC is negotiating deals that could very well have a greater impact on ALL UNITED PILOTS going forward.

Base closings and surpluses are covered very well in our CBA. Why is it that the Houston LEC wants to negotiate a special "Houston carve-out" without the benefit of the negotiating committee and normal vetting.

This is an appropriate quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer (Post 1872551)