Countdown to the CAL/UAL TA -- 45 days to go

[Captain X]

The 747 has traditionally always been the highest paid airplane at UAL up until the BK contract.

But it's not anymore.

The pay issue does not have to be connected to the SLI.

But it is the way it's being handled.

Again that's what the arbitrator is for.

We'll never get to an arbitrator without getting a full compensation proposal both sides agree with on the table.

Each MEC is pretty much dug in. One side is trying to grab more than they currently have and the other is trying to protect what they have. Sound familiar?

 

[eaglesview]

But it's not anymore.



But it is the way it's being handled.



We'll never get to an arbitrator without getting a full compensation proposal both sides agree with on the table.

Each MEC is pretty much dug in. One side is trying to grab more than they currently have and the other is trying to protect what they have. Sound familiar?[/QUOTE]

Just curious, does this mean the CO side will be happy being fenced off the majority of the widebodies since "that's what we (UAL) have."
Arguements like this are futile. Each carrier brings value to the table. Quit taking things so personal. Give the 747's the biggest raise we can get without giving up on money for the other fleets Don't put up any fences and let's move the on. (in case your wondering I feel the same way about the 787/350 or any other aircraft we get.

 

[AWACoff]

Don't put up any fences and let's move the on. (in case your wondering I feel the same way about the 787/350 or any other aircraft we get.

Eagle,

If we don't have any fences, your idea will work. However, that is not going to happen. If you are unsure as to why, ask your merger committee.

The reason I only quoted "half" of your previous post is because I was only responding to that half.



This is almost certain to turn into an East vs West debate. The East (UAL) is going to argue that their low paying wide bodies are the cat's meow. The West (CAL) is going to argue that their gaggle of narrow bodies are the cat's meow. At the end of it, a panel of 3 arbitrators will decide what is right and we can all start a new poop slinging thread of FlightInfo.

 

[eaglesview]

Eagle,

If we don't have any fences, your idea will work. However, that is not going to happen. If you are unsure as to why, ask your merger committee.

The reason I only quoted "half" of your previous post is because I was only responding to that half.



This is almost certain to turn into an East vs West debate. The East (UAL) is going to argue that their low paying wide bodies are the cat's meow. The West (CAL) is going to argue that their gaggle of narrow bodies are the cat's meow. At the end of it, a panel of 3 arbitrators will decide what is right and we can all start a new poop slinging thread of FlightInfo.

Once the arbitrators decide the poop slinging will have to end. If it doesn't then you can say we have allowed ourselves to become "east vs west."

As for UAL saying our widebodies, oh no excuse me, as you say our "low paying wide bodies" are the cats meow and CO saying their gaggle of narrow bodies are the cats meow, That's probably the way it will be. As I have said, UAL ALPA's job is to protect and fight for UAL pilots. CO ALPA has the same responsibility for CO pilots.

 

[AWACoff]

Once the arbitrators decide the poop slinging will have to end. If it doesn't then you can say we have allowed ourselves to become "east vs west."

As for UAL saying our widebodies, oh no excuse me, as you say our "low paying wide bodies" are the cats meow and CO saying their gaggle of narrow bodies are the cats meow, That's probably the way it will be. As I have said, UAL ALPA's job is to protect and fight for UAL pilots. CO ALPA has the same responsibility for CO pilots.

What else would you call a UAL 767 that pays less than a CAL 737...certainly not a "high paying widebody", right? Next you're going to tell us that buying Magnum condoms will make our special purpose bigger.

 

[AWACoff]

[

Just curious, does this mean the CO side will be happy being fenced off the majority of the widebodies since "that's what we (UAL) have."
Arguements like this are futile. Each carrier brings value to the table. Quit taking things so personal. Give the 747's the biggest raise we can get without giving up on money for the other fleets Don't put up any fences and let's move the on. (in case your wondering I feel the same way about the 787/350 or any other aircraft we get.

Tell you what, you can have all of your wide bodies fenced off and CAL will have it's higher pay fenced off. You can sit on your "C" scale wages and fly your big airplanes all over for less than what CAL 737 drivers are making...deal?

Debating with Eaglesview is like debating with a mentally challenged person. I'm out. Enjoy talking to yourself.

 

[eaglesview]

What else would you call a UAL 767 that pays less than a CAL 737...certainly not a "high paying widebody", right? Next you're going to tell us that buying Magnum condoms will make our special purpose bigger.

Personally I guess I would have left the adjective off. I don't get my thrills out of trying to build myself up on an annonymous web site but of that's how you get off, glad I could help.

 

[eaglesview]

Tell you what, you can have all of your wide bodies fenced off and CAL will have it's higher pay fenced off. You can sit on your "C" scale wages and fly your big airplanes all over for less than what CAL 737 drivers are making...deal?

Debating with Eaglesview is like debating with a mentally challenged person. I'm out. Enjoy talking to yourself.

I'm mentally challenged??? You can't get through your skull that the 'WE" is quickly becoming "US." I would think that WE should focus on a contract for all of US, including pay on all fleets. Try to keep up.

 

[SuperFLUF]

The 747 has traditionally always been the highest paid airplane at UAL up until the BK contract. It has a TOG of approx 200,000 LBS more than the 777. (speed/weight formula ring a bell?) The pay issue does not have to be connected to the SLI. Again that's what the arbitrator is for.

Correct, the pay issue does not have to be connected to the SLI.

Just like the 'status and catagory' of furloughed pilots hired by the other airline as covered in the transition agreement, an SLI arbitrator will not change anything that has already been agreed to by both parties.

SO, if both parties were to agree that for the purposes of SLI the 747 is to be considered the same as the 777, then the "seniority grab" is taken care of.
AND if for the purposes of the SLI, it is agreed by both parties that the 747 will NOT be fenced (so that the highest paying aircraft is available to ALL pilots based on seniority), then the "pay discrimination" is taken care of.

This could be easily reconciled with a compromise. If fairness was truly in play, instead of more me, me, me, unethical and selfish posturing. Ethics and morality are a constant value and not conditional to the topic. I take issue with the argument that each side should try to get the best for it's pilot group at the expense of the other pilot group. How about just doing what is right? Of course, human nature being what it is, I am not naive enough to think this will happen, but I won't excuse selfish behavior during this process as "what they should be doing".

Yes, the 747 should pay more than the 777. However, at the time of the merger announcement and corporate closing, it does not. Any attempt to correct this wrong should not be at the expense of either party and should be done in a fair, equitable manner.

 

[densoo]

Correct, the pay issue does not have to be connected to the SLI.

Just like the 'status and catagory' of furloughed pilots hired by the other airline as covered in the transition agreement, an SLI arbitrator will not change anything that has already been agreed to by both parties.

SO, if both parties were to agree that for the purposes of SLI the 747 is to be considered the same as the 777, then the "seniority grab" is taken care of.
AND if for the purposes of the SLI, it is agreed by both parties that the 747 will NOT be fenced (so that the highest paying aircraft is available to ALL pilots based on seniority), then the "pay discrimination" is taken care of.

This could be easily reconciled with a compromise. If fairness was truly in play, instead of more me, me, me, unethical and selfish posturing. Ethics and morality are a constant value and not conditional to the topic. I take issue with the argument that each side should try to get the best for it's pilot group at the expense of the other pilot group. How about just doing what is right? Of course, human nature being what it is, I am not naive enough to think this will happen, but I won't excuse selfish behavior during this process as "what they should be doing".

Yes, the 747 should pay more than the 777. However, at the time of the merger announcement and corporate closing, it does not. Any attempt to correct this wrong should not be at the expense of either party and should be done in a fair, equitable manner.

Excellent post! The only nut to crack is "This could be easily reconciled with a compromise." Therein is the problem.