• NC Software is having a Black Friday Sale Event thru December 4th on Logbook Pro, APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook, Cirrus Elite Binders, and more. Use coupon code BF2020 at checkout to redeem 15% off your purchase. Click here to shop now.
  • NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

Cal mec response to ual mec

Daddy69

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Posts
61
Total Time
A Lot
Yesterday, the UAL MEC Chairman and UAL local council representatives put out a series of strident blastmails on the subject of the JCBA, SLI and the union’s compensation proposal. In these communications, they seek to place blame on your MEC and its officers for not yet having reached agreement on a JCBA. We are taken to task for being honest about our intent to hold firm in our insistence that a fair and equitable seniority list integration process be followed. They cry foul that we have adamantly held that ALPA merger policy must be adhered to and that the Protocol agreement agreed to by both MECs be followed in its entirety. (The Protocol is available on the CAL MEC Web site.) Please allow me to clear up some of the many inaccuracies contained in yesterday’s UAL communications. The issue we face today with the compensation section is really quite simple. We were told several months ago by UAL MEC members that they had passed a resolution mandating that the B-747 be given premier aircraft status when the aircraft pay groupings were designed. In short, the UAL MEC wanted the B-747 to be the singular aircraft in the highest aircraft category for pay purposes. We had different ideas and insisted that an approach that created the most pay for the most pilots be considered. This issue came to a head in September at a joint session of the two MECs where, at the direction of our MEC, I advised the UAL MEC that we were not interested in the UAL methodology and that we favored allowing the Joint Negotiating Committee to work, unfettered by SLI considerations, on a solution that would be best suited for all CAL and UAL pilots.
Although the UAL MEC did not initially agree to this tack, eventually with the help of ALPA National the JNC was allowed to proceed with formulating a solution absent any SLI consideration. They did so after a few days of work in October. The JNC agreed on the solution, the two MEC chairs agreed on the solution and the CAL MEC agreed on the solution. The UAL MEC said no. With this stalemate hanging over our heads, we received management’s compensation proposal last week. Again, following the meetings with management, the JNC met in an attempt to come up with suitable aircraft groupings. Again, the JNC reached consensus on a proposal to be used to counter management’s proposal. I can only assume, based on yesterday’s missives from UAL, that yet again, the UAL MEC has rejected the JNC’s work. It is very clear that the problem is not with the CAL MEC or the JNC. The problem rests solely with the UAL MEC and their insistence that the compensation proposal enhance their SLI argument.
To further complicate matters, the UAL MEC has proposed a resolution to the ALPA Executive Council suggesting that the Council mandate that the JCBA cannot be used in the SLI arbitration. In essence, the UAL MEC wants to restrict the arbitration panel from hearing the whole truth. They want to carve out parts we believe would be necessary for the arbitrators to understand both pilot groups’ full stories. We will, of course, fight for the truth to be told in its unvarnished entirety.
Interestingly, while Capt. Morse holds up the new DAL contract as the model in her blastmail, she doesn’t acknowledge that the DAL contract has identical pay for the B-747 and B-777 aircraft: exactly what the JNC had proposed and she herself had approved for her MEC’s consideration. Unable to convince anyone of the merits of an irrational argument, now Capt. Morse and the UAL MEC are trying what can best be described as an attempt to shift blame from themselves by providing their pilots inaccurate information.
The CAL MEC believes that ALPA merger policy and the protocols we have agreed upon should be followed as we work to negotiate a JCBA and then an integrated seniority list. The CAL MEC is upholding our agreement – to leave the SLI and JCBA as separate processes. To carve out pay rates (or anything else for that matter), would be the antithesis of those agreements.
To our pilots, the UAL MEC, the United pilots, and to the UAL MEC officers, we will continue to honor the agreements that we have made regarding the JCBA and the SLI processes. We urge you to let these agreed upon processes work as they were designed so that we all can begin to reap the benefits of a new collective bargaining agreement. The goals we established many months ago have not changed. Together, we must work to reach agreement on a new contract that meets or exceeds the demands of our pilot group and to achieve a fair and equitable seniority list integration.
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman
 

Chairman

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Posts
401
Total Time
11000+
Does CAL not have different rates within there own 737 fleet. Kind of talking out of both sides of their mouth a bit isn't it!
 

captbert

Active member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
27
Total Time
some
Does CAL not have different rates within there own 737 fleet. Kind of talking out of both sides of their mouth a bit isn't it!


Irrelevant.

Read the letter a few more times, then you may understand what is going on.
 

Hvy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Posts
315
Total Time
17,000
Irrelevant.

Read the letter a few more times, then you may understand what is going on.

How is it irrelevant? Do all aircraft pay the same? Isn't pay dictated by aircraft size? Small 737s are paid differently than large 737s. 767s are paid more than 757s. So you're saying that 777 and 747s should be paid the same? There is a HUGE difference in size. Huge. So, following the aforementioned examples why should the 777 and 747 be paid the same?

Shouldn't the JCBA be kept SEPARATE from the SLI? It seems to me that by not following the standard for pay on the other aircraft (size determining pay) that an effort is being made to tie the JCBA in with the SLI.

You nor I will decide the SLI. An arbitrator will. He/she will look at everything. If your career at CAL was so much better and your expectations were so much higher then you will fare better. Let things stand on their own merits and keep the two separated. We are heading down the same path as USAirways and as we've seen, there are NO winners there.

We need the best contract that we can get for everyone (not CAL vs. UAL) to move forward in our careers and our lives. Bumping chests is going to get us nowhere.
 

waveflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Posts
10,005
Total Time
12000
This is very petty - it does appear to be an attempt for a few hundred at UAL to be atop the new carrier- while pissing on the other 11k-

One pay for all
 

flyguppy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Posts
130
Total Time
8000
In short, the UAL MEC wanted the B-747 to be the singular aircraft in the highest aircraft category for pay purposes. We had different ideas and insisted that an approach that created the most pay for the most pilots be considered.

In other words, the CAL MEC wants the bankruptcy concession, that the UAL pilots gave up of banding the 747/777 pay, to stay in place. Because? I can only assume because CAL does not have an aircraft of comparable size and therefore thinks it will hurt them in the upcoming SLI arbitration. Right?

To further complicate matters, the UAL MEC has proposed a resolution to the ALPA Executive Council suggesting that the Council mandate that the JCBA cannot be used in the SLI arbitration. In essence, the UAL MEC wants to restrict the arbitration panel from hearing the whole truth. They want to carve out parts we believe would be necessary for the arbitrators to understand both pilot groups’ full stories. We will, of course, fight for the truth to be told in its unvarnished entirety.

So the UAL MEC wants the 747 to have the highest pay since it is the largest aircraft, and they suggest the above to temper any feelings that the higher pay would be used against the CAL pilots in the SLI arbitration.

BUT, the CAL MEC says that won't fly? Why? Because they WANT to use the JCBA to show what? That they have higher pay for their 767s? Higher pay for their 737s?

If that's the case, I'm calling BS

The CAL MEC wants the concession to stay in place so they can show they have an airplane with comparable pay, all the while knowing they MUST use the JCBA to try and justify that they are not a narrow body airline?
 

EWR_FO

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Posts
415
Total Time
14,000
In other words, the CAL MEC wants the bankruptcy concession, that the UAL pilots gave up of banding the 747/777 pay, to stay in place. Because? I can only assume because CAL does not have an aircraft of comparable size and therefore thinks it will hurt them in the upcoming SLI arbitration. Right?



So the UAL MEC wants the 747 to have the highest pay since it is the largest aircraft, and they suggest the above to temper any feelings that the higher pay would be used against the CAL pilots in the SLI arbitration.

BUT, the CAL MEC says that won't fly? Why? Because they WANT to use the JCBA to show what? That they have higher pay for their 767s? Higher pay for their 737s?

If that's the case, I'm calling BS

The CAL MEC wants the concession to stay in place so they can show they have an airplane with comparable pay, all the while knowing they MUST use the JCBA to try and justify that they are not a narrow body airline?

Unfortunately, the post-bankruptcy UAL is what was brought to the table for the merger- that's reality. You can't retroactively change things to bolster your case, that's what is being attempted here. I don't blame them for trying but it will not fly. Ever.
 

nimtz

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,442
Total Time
?
Heartwarming to see that after completely shafting the UAL narrowbody guys in the last bankruptcy contract, the UAL MEC still feels the 400 drivers need extra love. Well the theme seems to be that United is a Widebody airline...
 

densoo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
2,054
Total Time
yes
The CAL MEC wants the concession to stay in place so they can show they have an airplane with comparable pay, all the while knowing they MUST use the JCBA to try and justify that they are not a narrow body airline?

The CAL MEC wants one thing: that the transition process agreement that the UAL MEC signed be held to, that the JNC will negotiate the contract. The JNC did negotiate it, and now the UAL MEC doesn't like the result and now are trying to change the agreed to rules, first by going to ALPA-N (and getting shot down) and now to the entire pilot group. They made an agreement, they should abide by it.
 

mamba20

Do what now?
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
1,030
Total Time
000000
Jesus H Christ! You've got to be kidding me! More he said she said BS from our two unions at the WORST POSSIBLE TIME! And they have the stones to call for unity when not 2 weeks after the CAL MEC is embrassed they start pulling this crap? My god, how the ******************** are we supposed to unite if our own unions can't agree to work things out and are using valuable time to take pot shots at each other? I am truly embarrassed. ALPA has got to go.
 

mamba20

Do what now?
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
1,030
Total Time
000000
Work the damn thing out already. I am tired of working for the worst pay and work rules in the industry. Stop saving the POS gummers and let the younger generation have a chance!

You over 60 wind bags have had enough! Stop taking off the backs of junior pilots and send your old asses to Florida to retire where you belong! Go turn on the heat in the middle of summer (instead of bumping the packs to 90 deg while you wear a sweater) and telling junior guys that it builds character to be junior. GET THE ******************** OUT!!! You got a gift with age 65 and now you are abusing it. GO die already! Its time to let people who can get out of the seat without a walker take control. I don;t give a ******************** about your retirement. You knew you had to retire at age 60! You should have planned better. Piss on you and ********************ing leave!
 
Last edited:

UALRATT

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Posts
214
Total Time
4000+
Unfortunately, the post-bankruptcy UAL is what was brought to the table for the merger- that's reality. You can't retroactively change things to bolster your case, that's what is being attempted here. I don't blame them for trying but it will not fly. Ever.

And as the TA clearly points out, sooner rather than later you'll be back to negotiating your own CBA much like UAL, and all that leverage will go up in smoke, and so would be your lunacy.

Welcome to JCBA II! Until then you can hold your own CAL pilots hostage to your own substandard contract.
 

luckytohaveajob

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Posts
1,114
Total Time
1+
CAL pilots dig substandard contracts and weak d!ck union reps. Its been the norm for 27 years.

CAL SUCKS!
 

Chairman

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Posts
401
Total Time
11000+
So here we go then if CAL wants banded pay!

744 stand alone

777 767 757

A320

737....

This way the 400 sets the bar the 757 our brought up to 777 pay.

the A320 surpasses the 737 pay

and the 737 pay steps up to where 757 pay was!

But argue it! Then we will know where you really stand!
 

Ben Franklin

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
580
Total Time
....
So here we go then if CAL wants banded pay!

744 stand alone

777 767 757

A320

737....

This way the 400 sets the bar the 757 our brought up to 777 pay.

the A320 surpasses the 737 pay

and the 737 pay steps up to where 757 pay was!

But argue it! Then we will know where you really stand!

What "band" do the "regional" jets fit into?... you know, those planes that perform a lot of the furloughed United pilots' old work; the planes that the CAL PILOTS want to scope in and that the United pilots gave away?


Sincerely,

B. Franklin
 

waveflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Posts
10,005
Total Time
12000
Blend ALL the a/c and set one payrate for all
 
Last edited:

johnsonrod

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Posts
4,218
Total Time
8000+
So here we go then if CAL wants banded pay!

744 stand alone

777 767 757

A320

737....

This way the 400 sets the bar the 757 our brought up to 777 pay.

the A320 surpasses the 737 pay

and the 737 pay steps up to where 757 pay was!

But argue it! Then we will know where you really stand!


The 737 pays more than the A320 at Delta I believe. And, you just won't lump the 777 with the 75/76. It should be lumped with the 744, that way more pilots are paid at the top scale. You United pilots are blinded by ego, and your airline is the weaker of the two together. You guys may be the next USAir East pilots(idiots).
 

johnsonrod

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Posts
4,218
Total Time
8000+
What "band" do the "regional" jets fit into?... you know, those planes that perform a lot of the furloughed United pilots' old work; the planes that the CAL PILOTS want to scope in and that the United pilots gave away?


Sincerely,

B. Franklin


Bravo! The UAL guys seem to forget the lack of narrowbody planes and abundance of RJs that THEY bring to the table.
 
Last edited:

EWR_FO

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Posts
415
Total Time
14,000
And as the TA clearly points out, sooner rather than later you'll be back to negotiating your own CBA much like UAL, and all that leverage will go up in smoke, and so would be your lunacy.

Welcome to JCBA II! Until then you can hold your own CAL pilots hostage to your own substandard contract.

If it's "lunacy" to not allow the rules to be changed retroactively, so be it. Not sure what "TA" you are talking about. If you're talking about the protocol agreement, the merger closing has already taken place so that section is moot.

Section 3
Suspension and Resumption of Separate Negotiations and Mediation
3-A. Suspension of separate negotiations and mediation.​
Subject to Sections 2-K and 3-B, the Parties will suspend their present negotiations under the RLA for new separate collective bargaining agreements, and United and ALPA will jointly request the NMB to administratively close the current mediation between them.

3-B. Resumption of separate negotiations and mediation.​
Continental and ALPA will resume their negotiations for a separate agreement under Section 6 of the RLA, and United and ALPA will jointly request the NMB to reopen their mediation for a separate agreement under Sections 5 and 6 of the RLA, (i) within thirty (30) days after termination of this Transition and Process Agreement, or (ii) at the option of any Party on fifteen (15) days notice to the other Parties, if by May 1, 2011 the Merger Closing has not taken place, or (iii) at any time by agreement.

3-C. RLA.​
Except as specified by this Transition and Process Agreement, each Party retains its rights under the RLA.


Section 4
Separation of Operations​
Continental and United will keep their flight operations separate until the
Operational Merger Date, or except as the Parties otherwise agree, specifically as follows:​
4-A. Collective bargaining agreements.​
The Continental CBA and United CBA will remain in effect for the respective Airlines and Pilot groups in accordance with the RLA except as modified by this Transition and Process Agreement or by the JCBA, or except as an Airline Party or Airline Parties and ALPA otherwise agree with respect to their particular CBA. Until the effective date of the JCBA, each of Continental and United will continue to operate under their respective Pilot CBAs as modified by this Transition and Process Agreement and by other agreements that may be entered into by ALPA and one or more Airline Parties with respect to their particular CBA.

 
Top