Having pioneered the abuse of ALPA merger policy

[Jetjockey]

Eagles??? HA! Is that washed up Vick still on the team?

 

[eaglesview]

Eagles??? HA! Is that washed up Vick still on the team?

Yup he sure is. It's a bad time to be a Philly sports fan. Eagles suck, Phillies suck, Flyers suck and Sixers are golfing already.

 

[Skyflyin]

Many opinions on this thread as we are all entitled to. In the end as has been stated numerous times, the arbitrators will make the decision and we will have to live with it. All of this senseless back and forth bickering serves no purpose other than to give ammunition to both sides in the fight for ultimate seniority. I would expect the final decision to be somewhat like the delta/northwest sli. Everyone remaining within a small percentage of where they are currently at on their respective seniority lists. Of course, it would depend on whether they are in the upper, middle or bottom portion of the list.
Personally, I would be happy just remaining on my current equipment and base. We shall see what happens soon enough. Good luck to us all.

Well said, although any thoughts/ideas from the gallery are worthless, it's still fun and entertaining to follow along. Especially since, unlike sports teams, the outcome will affect the rest of your career.

What I find interesting is that ALPA put longevity back into the merger policy to try and soothe US Air, but if you look at the practicality of it it runs smack into the face of career expectations especially in this case You cannot give L-UAL credit for longevity without adversely affecting the career expectations of the L-CAL guys and you cannot give the L-CAL guys full credit for their career expectations without ignoring the longevity of the L-UAL guys.

The arbitrators are going to have to choose one or the other, but more than likely will choose a mixture pissing everyone off. I've been enjoying reading the transcripts and I'll have to say I think our (CAL) merger committee has been doing a very good job and it will be interesting to see the UAL merger committee counter next month.

Popcorn ready and fingers crossed.

 

[Jetjockey]

Yup he sure is. It's a bad time to be a Philly sports fan. Eagles suck, Phillies suck, Flyers suck and Sixers are golfing already.

BLACKHAWKS is where it's at my friend. NHL>>>>REAL SPORT!

Back to regularly scheduled UA/CAL pilot bashing...............

 

[Dan Roman]

BLACKHAWKS is where it's at my friend. NHL>>>>REAL SPORT!

Back to regularly scheduled UA/CAL pilot bashing...............

You'd appreciate that HA has an A330 Captain that played for the Penguins for 12 years and also with Gretzky on the LA Kings.

 

[minrest]

Well said, although any thoughts/ideas from the gallery are worthless, it's still fun and entertaining to follow along. Especially since, unlike sports teams, the outcome will affect the rest of your career.

What I find interesting is that ALPA put longevity back into the merger policy to try and soothe US Air, but if you look at the practicality of it it runs smack into the face of career expectations especially in this case You cannot give L-UAL credit for longevity without adversely affecting the career expectations of the L-CAL guys and you cannot give the L-CAL guys full credit for their career expectations without ignoring the longevity of the L-UAL guys.

The arbitrators are going to have to choose one or the other, but more than likely will choose a mixture pissing everyone off. I've been enjoying reading the transcripts and I'll have to say I think our (CAL) merger committee has been doing a very good job and it will be interesting to see the UAL merger committee counter next month.

Popcorn ready and fingers crossed.

I continue to hear that the difference in alpa policy is the addition of Longevity. In reality, the major change was enacting in the new policy was mandating that a jcba must be completed prior to sli. The new policy goes on the state that longevity is one item (out of three) that "must" be "considered" but not be given any particular weight.

I have read the usair/awa ruling and it is apparent that longevity was given serious consideration in creating the list. At the end of the day, the arbitrator decided that, after considering longevity, other factors were of more significance in this particular merger. In dal/nwa, longevity was also "considered." Again, while not required to be considered in the policy, it nonetheless was considered.

The ual/cal sli "must" consider longevity. That does not mean that it must be given any bearing in the final product (just as in usair and delta). Therefore, it would seem that the actual process of sli is really no different than it was in previous mergers.

 

[eaglesview]

I continue to hear that the difference in alpa policy is the addition of Longevity. In reality, the major change was enacting in the new policy was mandating that a jcba must be completed prior to sli. The new policy goes on the state that longevity is one item (out of three) that "must" be "considered" but not be given any particular weight.

I have read the usair/awa ruling and it is apparent that longevity was given serious consideration in creating the list. At the end of the day, the arbitrator decided that, after considering longevity, other factors were of more significance in this particular merger. In dal/nwa, longevity was also "considered." Again, while not required to be considered in the policy, it nonetheless was considered.

The ual/cal sli "must" consider longevity. That does not mean that it must be given any bearing in the final product (just as in usair and delta). Therefore, it would seem that the actual process of sli is really no different than it was in previous mergers.

You must be right....Continentals proposal has the CO pilot hired 9/27/2011 senior to 1,608 ACTIVE (ie NOT INCLUDING FURLOUGHED GUYS) United pilots.... Kind of funny but I guess it's like buying a car....shoot for the moon.

 

[fokker pilot]

Don't forget Air Wisconsin. Unlike Frontier, UAL bought Air Wisconsin and UAL ALPA hosed the pilots !!!

 

[chppr5]

Don't forget Air Wisconsin. Unlike Frontier, UAL bought Air Wisconsin and UAL ALPA hosed the pilots !!!

UAL bought Wisconsin as a feeder. Just like AMR bought Command, Nashville, Metro, just like uSAir bought Henson, PSA, Penn and Suburban. Get over it!

 

[Skyflyin]

You must be right....Continentals proposal has the CO pilot hired 9/27/2011 senior to 1,608 ACTIVE (ie NOT INCLUDING FURLOUGHED GUYS) United pilots.... Kind of funny but I guess it's like buying a car....shoot for the moon.

I haven't seen the proposal yet, but CAL hasn't hired anyone, before this year, since 2008 so we don't have anyone hired in 2011. We had recalls in 2010 and 2011, but they were 2007 and 2008 hires.

 

[fokker pilot]

UAL bought Air Wisconsin for it's Air Carrier slots at ORD that UAL ALPA brethren advanced their members at the ARW pilot's expense !

 

[dmb41]

Mesaba, Colgan, and Pinnacle was the first arbitrated award to use the new Alpa merger policy. The award came out June 2011 and the stovepipe ratios were used.

1) CRJ-900 Captain (M: 272/P: 100/C:0)
2) Q400 plus CRJ-200 Captains (M:88/P:581/C:149)
3) Saab Captains (M:132/P:0/C:149)
4) Jet First Officers (CRJ-900 and CRJ-200) (M:314/P:448/C:0)
5) Turboprop First Officers (M:194/P:0/C:158)
6) Constructive Notice Pilots (M:16/P:225/C/152)

 

[Mil Leave]

Mesaba, Colgan, and Pinnacle was the first arbitrated award to use the new Alpa merger policy. The award came out June 2011 and the stovepipe ratios were used.

1) CRJ-900 Captain (M: 272/P: 100/C:0)
2) Q400 plus CRJ-200 Captains (M:88/P:581/C:149)
3) Saab Captains (M:132/P:0/C:149)
4) Jet First Officers (CRJ-900 and CRJ-200) (M:314/P:448/C:0)
5) Turboprop First Officers (M:194/P:0/C:158)
6) Constructive Notice Pilots (M:16/P:225/C/152)

Notice there is no category called furloughed (even though there were furloughed pilots) and each of the six categories was ordered by Date of Longevity.

Apply this to UAL/CON and I think you would have a "fair" list that meets both ALPAs policy and follows past precedent. You would have to have furlough protection for the Cat 5 folks who were already actively flying if a furloughed member went above them. -Mil

 

[minrest]

Notice there is no category called furloughed (even though there were furloughed pilots) and each of the six categories was ordered by Date of Longevity.

Apply this to UAL/CON and I think you would have a "fair" list that meets both ALPAs policy and follows past precedent. You would have to have furlough protection for the Cat 5 folks who were already actively flying if a furloughed member went above them. -Mil

There are some key differences in these two mergers. For starters, the furloughed pilots from mesaba had all been recalled prior to SLI (much as the cal furloughs have been recalled). Second, there were relative few furloghed pilots at mesaba, all of whom were working for the carrier that had a superior contract in terms of work rules and pay.

In the cal/ual situation, you have a handful of ual furloughs that have been recalled (all in the previous few months), with we'll over 1300 (20%) still on furlough. On the call side, all of the 147 furloughs were recalled over two years ago and an additional 500 +\- new hires brought in. It's apples and oranges.

 

[Chairman]

I haven't seen the proposal yet, but CAL hasn't hired anyone, before this year, since 2008 so we don't have anyone hired in 2011. We had recalls in 2010 and 2011, but they were 2007 and 2008 hires.

I assume you have not read the transcripts or actually looked at the seniority list but you are wrong. 2 pilots were hired 9/27/2011 and placed above every furloughed UAL in direct violation of the transition agreement.

I won't post names but they are both Guam Based.

 

[Skyflyin]

I assume you have not read the transcripts or actually looked at the seniority list but you are wrong. 2 pilots were hired 9/27/2011 and placed above every furloughed UAL in direct violation of the transition agreement.

I won't post names but they are both Guam Based.

I SAID I had not seen the list, but now I have and I understand that these TWO individuals were embroiled in a dispute and both have settled lawsuits to obtain those dates.

I don't know the facts about the lawsuits so I can't say whether it's fair or not, but it doesn't sound like it was done purposefully to screw the U-hires.

 

[Mr Proachpoint]

Chairman, The two individuals you are concerned about were involved with the CAL hiring process from as early as 2006. Among many factors, the slow process of USERRA based litigation caused their rightful hire dates to be pushed back many years. The entire process began and ended long before the merger or any TPA existed.

 

[Chairman]

Chairman, The two individuals you are concerned about were involved with the CAL hiring process from as early as 2006. Among many factors, the slow process of USERRA based litigation caused their rightful hire dates to be pushed back many years. The entire process began and ended long before the merger or any TPA existed.

TPA was pretty specific. But glad the company and Union are not worried about law suits because they are facing one for ignoring what they agreed to.

Page 11 of TPA dated 19 Jul 10 states:

(iii) Pilots employed pursuant to this Section 7-B will exercise seniority for all purposes at the employing Airline in the seniority order of their originating Airline but junior to all Pilots who were on the seniority list of the employing Airline prior to the Merger Agreement Date. Upon implementation of the ISL Pilots will exercise seniority pursuant to their position on the ISL. All Pilots hired by the employing Airline after the Merger Agreement Date who are not Pilots employed pursuant to this Section 7-B will exercise their seniority for all purposes junior to all Pilots who were on either seniority list prior to the Merger Agreement Date.


The Constructive Notice Date is typically the Merger Announcement Date and, by agreement of the parties in this case, is May 3, 2010. See Protocol Agreement, JX B, ? 2.C. Accordingly, only UAL and CAL pilots on the separate seniority lists with dates of hire prior to May 3, 2010 may be placed on the ISL; all pilots hired thereafter should be placed below them in date of hire order.

 

[eaglesview]

These two pilots, and this list are meaningless. It is the CO's merger teams pie in the sky list. The entire thing will be redone many more times.

 

[Chairman]

These two pilots, and this list are meaningless. It is the CO's merger teams pie in the sky list. The entire thing will be redone many more times.

These two are a huge deal because of LOA 25 if 1 furloughed pilot goes below them as longevity it tied to the cal pilot above you. Right now everyone is on 6th year pay next month it could be reduced to 9/27/2011... It does matter

 

[Mr Proachpoint]

That's a good point I hadn't considered Chairman. I have no dog in this fight, and I'm not too familiar with all the TPA details, just know that those guys were supposed to be hired around 2006/07. Not sure why they have 2011 dates on the list though.

 

[eaglesview]

These two are a huge deal because of LOA 25 if 1 furloughed pilot goes below them as longevity it tied to the cal pilot above you. Right now everyone is on 6th year pay next month it could be reduced to 9/27/2011... It does matter

All I am saying is this list will be revamped many times. It's too early to get wrapped around the axle now.

 

[Jetjockey]

Here's my take.

CAL proposal pisses off UAL pilots.
In May, UAL proposal pisses off CAL pilots..........

In August, ARBITRATORS' DECISION pisses everyone off.

 

[Yuppyguppy]

Explain to me how we are going for a homerun? I frankly do not even understand what the exact end play it is that our SLI methodology would produce. CA to CA, FO to FO integration? I think that means we use our total CA and FO numbers, and then integrate separately pilots from the two seats at the two airlines. Seems to me it anchors the top and bottom and puts some play in the middle. Remember the top of the CAL list is senior in all respects to all but a handful of UAL pilots. So the top several hundred should be 90% CAL if we use merger policy.

But UAL wants us fenced off their airplanes and fenced out of their hubs. They want to keep what they feel they brought to the merger, and they want to take what we brought. Typical UAL; They've been that way forever.

Yes kinda like you want to staple all the UAL furloughed guys below you. CAL had 20 767s and 14 777's compared to UAL's 24 747s 52 777s and 35 767s. Yeah I can see a fence. Typical greedy CAL pilots. But then again some of you "saved the company."

 

[Mil Leave]

There are some key differences in these two mergers. For starters, the furloughed pilots from mesaba had all been recalled prior to SLI (much as the cal furloughs have been recalled). Second, there were relative few furloghed pilots at mesaba, all of whom were working for the carrier that had a superior contract in terms of work rules and pay.

In the cal/ual situation, you have a handful of ual furloughs that have been recalled (all in the previous few months), with we'll over 1300 (20%) still on furlough. On the call side, all of the 147 furloughs were recalled over two years ago and an additional 500 +\- new hires brought in. It's apples and oranges.

You do realize the 147 plus the additional 500 were re-hired/hired after the MAD? I find it unlikely that the arbitrators will allow three years of growth on one side to be credited to only that one side.

We are just along for the ride. Interesting to discuss, but in the end we obviously have no inputs.

 

[AirMike]

From what I have seen as an outsider, most of the posts regarding the merger on multiple internet forums have been started by United pilots. It all seems a bit desperate. I envision a cornered rat every time I see a new post about the SIL or how the furloughed guys are not going to be stapled. Just my $.02. I hope it all works out and I can't wait to be flying at United in a few years. Cheers!

 

[Flopgut]

Yes kinda like you want to staple all the UAL furloughed guys below you. CAL had 20 767s and 14 777's compared to UAL's 24 747s 52 777s and 35 767s. Yeah I can see a fence. Typical greedy CAL pilots. But then again some of you "saved the company."

There would be no way for you to know this, but when I wrote that I was expecting something more moderate. I am surprised by our proposal. My guess is that it's become obvious a windfall can't be avoided and we had to swing for the fence. (literally and figuratively) No way to know what's going to happen. It's going to be real hard to put the middle of this list together. Should a matter of months longevity put a UAL pilot in front of a CAL pilot when the other factors put them thousands of numbers apart? I'm sure your answer is: of course! My thought on that, and the reason I started this thread, you ought not get any better consideration of your longevity than you have given others in the past. Think about that.

I don't want to lose, but I'm pretty sure I don't want to win either at this point. This whole process is broken.

 

[bpapaDC8]

From what I have seen as an outsider, most of the posts regarding the merger on multiple internet forums have been started by United pilots. It all seems a bit desperate. I envision a cornered rat every time I see a new post about the SIL or how the furloughed guys are not going to be stapled. Just my $.02. I hope it all works out and I can't wait to be flying at United in a few years. Cheers!

Be sure to mention UAL pilots as cornered rats in your interview. It will make things go much smoother, I promise!

 

[Crucianpilot]

Yes kinda like you want to staple all the UAL furloughed guys below you. CAL had 20 767s and 14 777's compared to UAL's 24 747s 52 777s and 35 767s. Yeah I can see a fence. Typical greedy CAL pilots. But then again some of you "saved the company."

So where exactly do you expect the furloughed guys to be put? You can't certainly expect a furloughed pilot to be put on a list ahead of an active pilot regardless of hire date.

 

[Chairman]

So where exactly do you expect the furloughed guys to be put? You can't certainly expect a furloughed pilot to be put on a list ahead of an active pilot regardless of hire date.

CAL put there furloughed pilots ahead of line holding 747 FO's so I guess they don't have an issue with it!