Come on sleeves. This is a reach and you must know it. But since you seem to enjoy semantics, I'll play the game. No there wasn't a 737NG base in DCA. There was a 737 Classic base. One of the reasons that the 737-500's aren't coming back from Russia is that the Fed's were going to make us operate them as a separate fleet. So the rumor goes.

Sound dumb? I agree.

The MOU 14 was a mistake by our union in my opinion. Gave the company relief on a mistake that they made which should hvae cost them dearly. Luckily the domiciles that have seen regular bumps haven't tried to expand that mistake..... until now.

Think of it this way. I think we can all agree that UCH doesn't do anything outside of Section 6 just to be nice to the pilots. So if it's not a win for them, why would they be willing to accept it??

 

MOU 14 was needed considering what was going on and effectively protecting the LCAL guys from flush bids as well. Thank you MEC and especially BenS for voting for it.

BenS knows perfectly well the intent of MOU 14 and is trying to use MOU 14 as a means of increasing his credibility with the surplus resolution. He could care less about the long term impact and effects for all United pilots. After management finishes rearranging our bases, fleets and seats and with the "Houston carve out" we'll have about half our pilots running around with super seniority and negating REAL SENIORITY. Here's the real kicker, the company can and will turn any and all pilots into MIGRANT PILOTS.

This is not a LCAL/LUAL thing. We as United pilots, regardless of legacy affiliation, need to hold all of our elected representatives accountable and responsible for their actions. Get involved and make sure your word is heard or YOU WILL lose the high ground.

 

Seriously sleeves, you make Staller's gibberish look reasonable in comparison. Think about that. And that goes for you as well A320Fumes.

 

Then we agree. MOU 14 was a mistake. It gave the company relief for the benefit of a few. It is not semantics. I do not believe the part about the 737-500 being separate as they were already a single base at LCAL, we still use the LCAL certificate. It is still a single fleet at SWA. BTW the base name is 737 not 737ng as it is at Delta.

At any rate it does not matter in the UPA if the base was previously open or not. Section 8-H is all that was needed and a special few were given a special deal. Now a lot of people are gonna be wronged if they don't get it too.

 

BS. It's not the same, closing a base is in 8-H as you pointed out. Displacements is in 8-E. There are a lot of MOUs and LOAs in the contract where people have been "wronged". LOA 25 comes to mind. Where "a special few" got F'd on furlough pay credit, while others did not. The SEA base was guaranteed not to be closed until after a certain time...giving "a special few, a special deal". LOA 15 gives paid moves to the mainland 48 states to pilots who retired in Hawaii! LOA 18 was a special carve out for LCAL instructors...those "special few". I don't see a resolution on any of these items. Aren't we all "wronged if we don't get it too"???

BTW...take a look at LOA 23 Reserve Reset. We may be all "wronged" on that deal. Totally up to the company.

 

So you think MOU 14 was a mistake (as I do, and have said about 25 times here) and rather than learn from it you want to do it again? That makes no sense. You realize that the group that you are claiming are being "wronged" by MOU are the very people that got their Captain bids in a suspect way out of seniority, right? I'm not going to bother to rehash THAT argument again here, but I think if you live by the special deal then you should be prepared to die by the special deal.

Lastly, as far as the 737-500's being a separate fleet, it doesn't matter what SWA does. It only matters what the POI at UAL does. Example, making UCH fly the 756 and 76T fleets as separate for so long. I'm just passing along what I heard during 737 School in IAH. I have no idea whether it's accurate or not, but I'm assuming the training center would have more knowledge about the situation than you do

 

What I have said repeatedly is that MOU 14 opened up this can of worms. It is wrong to give it to some and not to others and it is going to be very divisive. As I have posted on here before I actually don't like the plan.
As far as how someone got there Capt. seat...what does it even mean to get them in a suspect way? They put in a bid! It seems you have been down in IAH so I guess you figured out the process. Pre SLI, without a seniority list by definition there cannot be out of seniority bids. Many of the guys in the bottom of the IAH list got there on bid 12-08,13-04 and 13-08. Those bids came out 2 years, 1 1/2 years and 1 years before SLI. They were all in position well before SLI.
Lastly, really you heard it at the school house? Bwaaaa, that place is infamous for giving out false rumors. The only worse place for info is probably APC. If the company wants to make it a combined fleet I am sure they can figure out a way as it was done before and is currently being done now.

 

They can bid back in using their seniority. They won't be wronged because they don't get a special carve-out. Also there probably won't actually be bids back in for a while, so this whole thing is a moot point.

 

Both resolutions down in flames on voice votes at MEC.

Next...

 

Big Surprise.