Having pioneered the abuse of ALPA merger policy

[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