Is It The Pay Houston ?

Reply Subscribe

Page 9 of 11

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

05-03-2016, 09:09 AM

#81

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

I say in plan English - the JCBA was not the place for SLI bargaining and posturing.

Yet both sides did it and that's how we wound up with the pay bands and fences. You just choose to ignore that.

05-03-2016, 09:49 AM

#82

AllenAllert

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2015

Posts: 846

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Yet both sides did it and that's how we wound up with the pay bands and fences. You just choose to ignore that.

Sorry, NO - both side didn't do it.

PAY BANDS - JCBA - JP tried to improve LCAL SLI position at the expense of many pilots pay.

FENCES - SLI - LUAL asked for 747 Fence and JP said 'me too' for the 787.

Two totally different things. The UALALPA side understood the final SLI would be the result of the ALPA merger policy and JP refused to accept it. CALALPA's JP was wrong!

Last edited by AllenAllert; 05-03-2016 at 10:04 AM.

05-03-2016, 11:15 AM

#83

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

Both sides proposed pay bands that advantaged one of their equipment types. LUAL additionally asked for a fence. Somehow, LCAL is greedy and LUAL's intent was pure? Gotcha!

My bad for bothering to engage you and wasting the time and bandwidth.

05-03-2016, 12:17 PM

#84

Scott Stoops

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2010

Position: 737 Cap

Posts: 451

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Both sides proposed pay bands that advantaged one of their equipment types. LUAL additionally asked for a fence. Somehow, LCAL is greedy and LUAL's intent was pure? Gotcha!

My bad for bothering to engage you and wasting the time and bandwidth.

Tell me why does the 747 at 875k pounds pay the same as a 787 at 550k pounds. Yet the 320 pays more than the 319 with a weight differential of less than 8k pounds. Pay banding as it stands in this contract was gamesmanship to influence the sli. It failed and we are all worse for it. I still voted yes so I am as much to blame as...

If we are really going to endorse pay banding the lets go single aisle and dual aisle. Considering the 767-3 has 5 less seats than the 787-8, it should be banded with dual aisle airplanes. Narrow body and wide body.

Last edited by Scott Stoops; 05-03-2016 at 12:30 PM.

05-03-2016, 12:32 PM

#85

JoePatroni

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2009

Posts: 1,825

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops

Tell me why, then does the 747 at 875k pounds pay the same as a 787 at 550k pounds. Yet the 320 pays more than the 319 with a weight differential of less than 8k pounds. Pay banding as it stands in this contract was gamesmanship to influence the sli. It failed and we are all worse for it. I still voted yes so I am as much to blame as...

If we are really going to endorse pay banding the lets go single aisle and dual aisle. Considering the 767-3 has 5 less seats than the 787-8, it should be banded with dual aisle airplanes. Narrow body and wide body.

Pre-merger was the 747 banded with the 777 at L-UAL? At L-CAL the 787 was banded with the 777, I'm assuming the pre-merger situation had at least some bearing on the negotiations. Not saying one way is better or worse, just that everything isn't necessarily a conspiracy. Scott S., not directed at you, just to be clear- I appreciate the info you bring.

05-03-2016, 12:33 PM

#86

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops

That's basically what CAL had prior to the merger. UAL had the 777 and 747 banded together at the merger. Plenty of gamesmanship on both sides that brought us to where we are now. I don't believe the CAL side was innocent, nor given the facts, do I believe UAL was innocent. You and AA want to believe the fairy tale LUALALPA was just looking out for all of us, go ahead. Time to move on.

05-03-2016, 12:49 PM

#87

Scott Stoops

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2010

Position: 737 Cap

Posts: 451

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

I don't think even for a moment that Ualalpa was looking out for anyone but Ualalpa. I also agree that it is time to move on.

Unfortunately it will literally be years before the damage done is made moot for many pilots on both sides.

05-03-2016, 01:25 PM

#88

AllenAllert

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2015

Posts: 846

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Both sides proposed pay bands that advantaged one of their equipment types. LUAL additionally asked for a fence. Somehow, LCAL is greedy and LUAL's intent was pure? Gotcha!

My bad for bothering to engage you and wasting the time and bandwidth.

When you move on - you should run. The biggest failure in your logic is to see that the JCBA and SLI were separate process. JP had the same problem. And yes, the UALALPA's intent was to be pure in following the new merger policy. CALALPA's JP supported by the CAL pilots did not.

Enough said - go ask your person in the know the purpose of the new ALPA merger policy. You'd be surprised to find it was designed to prevent the situation we find ourselves. Better yet, don't believe me or your person in the know, but take the time to look for a copy of that merger policy.

05-03-2016, 01:27 PM

#89

svergin

UCH Pilot

Joined APC: Oct 2014

Position: 787

Posts: 776

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Stoops

I know the answer. It was feared that LUA would ask for 4 categories for S&C. 747, 777, 767/757, narrowbody. So we wanted to make sure that we were on equal par and wanted as many airplanes as possible in the highest band. So 767-400, 787 (LUA didn't have any) pay the same as 777 and we weren't going to allow the 747 to pay more than the 777 and then low and behold in the SLI find out because its "premium" end up with 400 of the top spots for Captains and 1,200 of the top FO spots for LUA FOs.

Plus we weren't flying it so we didn't care. Pay banding it helped us get better 787 rates for sure.

Its all over now so who really cares. Let's just move on please.