Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Cal mec response to ual mec

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Daddy69

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Posts
61
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
 
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.

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.
 
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
 
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?
 
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.
 
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...
 
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.
 
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.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top