• 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.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

some reported united contract details

nimtz

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,442
Total Time
?
... with a gun to their heads. pierce has been threatening a lorenzoII breakup of L-UAL just like what happened to Eastern for quite a while.

This TA is likely to be voted in. At that point, my furlough longevity credit will hinge on where I'm integrated into the combined list.

I don't think JP is the head of Network Planning just yet so not sure he pulls the levers on EAL II. Giving your MEC a pass on boning 1437 members based on Stockholm Syndrome is pretty pathetic.
 

captain caveman

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Posts
272
Total Time
8000
This is brilliantly crafted to get passed by 51% with the old guys voting it in for their short term benefits. Delta passed by 63%.
 

Continental

Farting on your Jumpseat
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Posts
180
Total Time
IRO
Understand this UAL guys. Every section has a loophole in there that will allow the company to do whatever they want. The company WILL interpret the contract however best suits them. They WILL F you every chance they get. Even if you are in the right they will say too bad. Months later when your grievance is heard they will come back and say "Oh sorry we wont do it again" Until they do.

THE CAL MGT hates it's pilots and will exploit the contract every chance they get. The language in this thing allows the company to do whatever they want "circumstances beyond companies control" Weather, economy, Jeff stubbed his toe. Doesn't matter You will get F'd sooner or later. Probably both.

Collectively we can vote this thing down and get a much better contract with much tighter language.
 

TCBKING

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Posts
207
Total Time
3500
This is a concessionary contract. Period. Unbelievable. When does it end? How about ALPA hiring professional negotiators to do this job. Because everyone doing this now is plain terrible.

Just sad.
 

densoo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
2,054
Total Time
yes
Understand this UAL guys. Every section has a loophole in there that will allow the company to do whatever they want. The company WILL interpret the contract however best suits them. They WILL F you every chance they get. Even if you are in the right they will say too bad. Months later when your grievance is heard they will come back and say "Oh sorry we wont do it again" Until they do.

THE CAL MGT hates it's pilots and will exploit the contract every chance they get. The language in this thing allows the company to do whatever they want "circumstances beyond companies control" Weather, economy, Jeff stubbed his toe. Doesn't matter You will get F'd sooner or later. Probably both.
Not sure they hate them, but maybe worse, they are dismissive of them. This was perfectly stated when the CEO said "labor is not needed for this merger." Unfortunately this attitude that starts at the top tends to permeate the company and shows in how pilots are treated by the whole organization.
 

BigMeat

Registered Loser
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Posts
377
Total Time
10000+
I have yet to meet one CAL pilot willing to vote for this. UAL on the other hand I have already run into several that are willing to accept it. Sad. The mighty UAL. Yeah right. Welcome to the Mesa of the majors.
 

NuGuy

Ex-Commuter
Joined
May 30, 2003
Posts
2,375
Total Time
10000
Passes 60/40. In a year you won't find anyone who voted "yes".

Weird how that works.

Nu
 

jetfueljunkey

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Posts
87
Total Time
15,500
Just vote no

I have yet to meet one CAL pilot willing to vote for this. UAL on the other hand I have already run into several that are willing to accept it. Sad. The mighty UAL. Yeah right. Welcome to the Mesa of the majors.

Hey at least mesa has scope worth something.. Your new scope sucks A$$... While Mesa's contract may not be airtight thats because they are only on their 3rd contract. What are you on, the 15th or 20th contract. GROW A SET AND vote NO! OLD Farts VOTE no, step up and do the right thing, you've already screwed over the junior guys how many times now? Anybody that wants a Career at LCAL and LUAL show management something they haven't seen form you ever...UNITY in a HUGE NO vote!
 

flygirlqt

Legal Eagle
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Posts
515
Total Time
------
I have yet to meet one CAL pilot willing to vote for this. UAL on the other hand I have already run into several that are willing to accept it. Sad. The mighty UAL. Yeah right. Welcome to the Mesa of the majors.

The brain surgeons caving??? Blasphemous!!!
 

Continental

Farting on your Jumpseat
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Posts
180
Total Time
IRO
(1 of 2)
I. WHY WE DO NOT SUPPORT THIS TA- A SECTION BY SECTION OPINION

SECTION 1- SCOPE
While the language that guides our scope restrictions has been tightened up, the fact that we are moving from 50-seat to 76-seat aircraft with respect to Express Flying carries a huge price tag and moves us further away from our goal of limiting not just the quantity of outsourced flying, but the quality of outsourced flying as well. One of the most consistent expectations we saw from previous polling data of our pilots was to “hold the line” with respect to outsourced flying. This TA does not accomplish that.

Even though there is a hard cap on the number of “regional” aircraft, these new generations of airplanes are no longer merely “feeder” aircraft that provide traffic from smaller outstations to hubs as they were intended to do. They now have the capability of operating segments that are longer than three hours, provide mainline passenger comfort, and first class seating.

It's important to note that while there is a formula that limits the number of 76-seat aircraft (1-C-1-g), this TA still allows the company to operate up to 153 76-seaters at 120% of our mainline single-aisle block hours, should the company elect to not exercise its right to increase 76-seaters. In other words, while most of us look at the grand total (“what's the limit?”), there's no proof that they intend to reach that limit, and if they don't, there's no requirement for them to reduce the block hour ratio.

SECTION 2- DEFINITIONS
This section is fairly straight-forward, however, we are concerned that the plethora of conditional statements- you know- those “if’s”, “and’s”, or “but’s” that the company has used in their favor in the past- still exist throught the TA. We would like to have seen more definitive language.

SECTION 3- COMPENSATION
The most glaring failure of this section is that we trail behind DAL by a year in pay rates. While excuses abound, there is no justification for this. And even though we theoretically exceed them after their amendable date (assuming they don't complete a new TA as quickly as they recently did), we will potentially never catch up to them when you factor in the time value of money.

We also failed to achieve one of our commitments to the pilot group, which was demanding 100% retroactive pay. This is a huge loss for our pilots who have suffered under a contract that thus far has been in effect for twice as long as it was supposed to last. We have been working longer under a contract beyond its amendable date (approaching four full years) than we have worked while it was in force (three years and eight months). This also removes any precedent for expedited negotiations in the future.

SECTION 4- EXPENSES
A little “nit-picking” here, but without a definition of “breakfast” or “meal”, we can only imagine which flavor of cereal we are going to end up with as our “breakfast” or how nutritious that bagel dog “meal” will be.

Secondly, there are a couple of omissions from our current contract. Particularly in light of the impending uniform change, this TA removes the inclusion of “five uniform shirts/blouses” that was included in the uniform allotment in Contract '02. Reimbursement for passport and visa fees is also missing- unless you are required to show up in person, in which case you receive an hour of pay for your time- but nothing for the fees themselves.

SECTION 5- HOURS OF SERVICE
Fair is fair, and this is one area where we can actually note some improvements (of course, they are all relative- based on our prior concessionary contract). Full credit towards line construction for things such as vacation, training, and deadhead is one of the few bright spots in this TA.

Section 5-C (Deadhead) is one area where we expected to borrow from the UAL contract, but ended up with something closer to ours. Deadheading pilots should be booked in the highest cabin- regardless of the length of flight. Furthermore, “...at time of booking...” is ripe for manipulation by the company and should be worded more specifically.

Also, while a pilot will receive add pay if required to sit in a middle seat, the process of submitting a pay claim and having to provide evidence (5-C-1-j) places the onus on the pilot rather than the company.

Another practically unbelievable loss in this TA can be found in Section 5-D: Deadhead Deviation. Whereas in our current contract, the pilot simply notifies Scheduling of his intent to “fake deadhead” and is not liable for reassignment unless the company can make direct contact, in this TA, the pilot is on the hook and has to verify he has not been reassigned. This amounts to a free "reminder" to the company and practically a solicitation for reassignment, and if they don't have a reassignment ready to go, the pilot can be told to wait around for up to three hours while they come up with a reassignment! To expand- when the operation falls apart (which happens all too often), Scheduling simply changes a pilot's last leg to a deadhead to keep it legal, then sorts it out later- sometimes days later. By requiring the pilot to check in with Scheduling, they now have the ability to keep him captive (quite literally) until they figure out what to do. This will cost pilots many extra days away from home and essentially treated as reserves. This is a huge loss!

We hate to see the words, “The company may...” because we all know that translates as, “If it benefits the company (to the detriment of the pilot), the company will...” We find this term under 5-E-2-b-(4), where “the company may increase any report time...” Yes, it may count as duty time, but it also counts as time we are at work and not being paid for our work.

Another big point of contention we have with this TA is the reserve system. For starters, still having only 12 days off (in a 30-day month) is still too few. Taking into account that a lineholder (averaging 5 hours of pay per day) will theoretically have at least 14 days off on average (80 hours of credit), our reserves should have the same. Instead, they will be scheduled for more days (18) for less credit (70 hours). To make matters worse, if you are a “global” reserve, you just went from having 4 movable days in our current contract, to having 6 days that are not “holy” and thus subject to assignment. Can you say “concession”?

“M5D.” Learn this term as it is a new buzzword and one of the big gains in this TA. We admit it- we've finally found something that makes us think this is a “mature” contract. So, being the good sports that we are, we'll put one checkmark in the “win” column.

Of course, we are still skeptical. Our company hates to pay us for not working, so we suspect they won't. For those trips that currently credit less than five hours per day (mostly domestic 737 and 757 trips), we foresee Scheduling doing some shuffling. Yes- you will have a more productive schedule (which, again, is a win), but you will earn every penny of it.

SECTION 8- STAFFING
Uh oh. Here we go again- that dreaded staffing formula. We have always been told that if the company actually followed this formula, we would be severely understaffed. Nonetheless, here it is again.

Take a close look. At first it seems like an improvement- going from our current “10% reserve” to either 14% or 12% based on the fleet. That's an improvement, right? Not quite. In our current contract, the “scheduled block hours” is divided by 83:30 (an assumed average per pilot), whereas in this TA, the total block time is divided by 87:00. This means that not only is the assumed average higher, but that amounts to a 5% reduction in pilots. Furthermore, the charter hour divisor is now also 87:00 hours, compared to 65:00 in our current contract. We realize that this change was made to account for the increased credit values, but when it all washes out, it means that we will continue to be severely understaffed, as we have been for years.

SECTION 9- TRAINING
“A lineholder shall self-schedule recurrent ground school training on a day off...” (9-B-4-a). Need we say more?

We do think that travel to and from recurrent training being booked in first class is a nice touch. Now why couldn't that language be included for “operational” deadheads where pilots are actually involved in flying real airplanes with real people in them?

Traditional GSR and ASR CBTs are not considered “distance learning” and therefore completed on your own time, on your own dime.

SECTION 11- VACATION
“Thank you for your 30 years of service. You don't need an extra two days, do you?” We get it- a minor change that only affects a very few pilots, but still have to wonder why they bothered to change this.

SECTION 13- SICK LEAVE
Unfortunately, no real improvements here. Still accumulate 5 hours/month, which is completely inadequate and deters pilots from actually using sick leave when legitimately sick. Hope you aren't sick more than 12 days during the year!

Furthermore, whereas in our current contract, proof of illness was only required for “reasonable cause” or if it occurred in conjunction with a vacation or holiday. In the current TA, “The company may require a doctor's note before paying such sick leave” (13-A-5). The company would never abuse that, now would they?
 

Continental

Farting on your Jumpseat
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Posts
180
Total Time
IRO
(2 of 2)

SECTION 20- SCHEDULING
There's so much here, that we're going to list them bullet-point style. Follow along!
20-C-1-c: “catastrophic failure” of PBS leads to a rerun and extended deadlines. Yeah- that'll never happen. And we will end up putting our lives on hold while we wait for the delayed results.
20-C-4-d: the company gets to pick PBS vendors. We're sure they'll find something better that costs less.
20-D-3-b: PBS Dispute Resolution Committee- “We know it's flawed, but the trips you should have been awarded have already been given away. Sorry. How about some 'Availability Days'?”
20-F (and beyond): we are all still essentially reserve pilots with advance assignments.
20-F-1-a-(3): can be reassigned to a phone availability period that starts up to four hours earlier than your original report time. In our current contract, it cannot start earlier than your original report time.
20-F-1-a-(8): can be reassigned to a trip that departs three hours earlier (or at 1800, whichever is earlier), up from two hours in our current contract.
20-H-5-b-(5): “The company's determination of 'acceptability' may change.” Yikes!
20-H-7: Visiting reserve. A euphemism for “system reserve.” Prepare to be deadheaded all over the place.
20-K: Scheduling of Reserve Crews. We have a fundamental problem with the fact that seniority does not ever enter into the equation. We recognize there is a demographic of pilots who actually like to take advantage of being senior on reserve, and we respect that. Unfortunately, this TA does not. In addition, all the old abusive rules from our current contract are still here. Very disappointing.
20-K-6-f: we've spent years fighting against double duty periods for reserves, and now we've not only condoned it, we've made it contractually approved. What happened to safety?
20-L: Reassignments. Still allows free reign by the company to reassign a pilot into a day off. Unacceptable. And if you are a widebody fleet, your first day lost is not subject to restoration (20-N-1-b).

SECTION 22- RETIREMENT
We can almost say with confidence that this is the one cornerstone that is actually industry leading. Our only gripe here is that there is not a single attempt to improve the situation for those who lost hundreds of thousands of dollars to the frozen pension plan. That is a disappointment to those who have served the company longest.

SECTION 24- INSURANCE
Some improvements, some losses. Overall neutral.

LOAs & MOUs
While we won't delve through all the Letters of Agreement nor the MOUs, there are two specific items we would like to point out.

The Implementation Schedule and Process is disappointing. While we recognize that many changes take time to implement, there are too many items that are beneficial to our pilots that are delayed until the third full bid period or even as long as nine months later.

Throughout contract negotiations your JNC had a disagreement with the company about how many reserves would be required to staff the airline. To solve this disagreement the JNC made a bet with the company in the form of the Reserve Reset LOA. If the reserve staffing level exceeds 16.6% ALPA will become liable to pay the company money, up to $30 million per year (based upon how far above 16.6% staffing). While it would be extremely costly to purposely keep staffing above 16.6% just to win the bet, we find it risky to put ALPA money and possibly work rule changes in jeopardy to see who is right.

Captain Eric Hunter
Council 171 Chairman

Captain Robert McCartney
Council 153 Chairman

First Officer Ben Salley
Council 171 Vice Chairman

First Officer Mike Seidner
Council 153 Vice Chairman
 

list2002

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Posts
323
Total Time
***
Thanks Continental, was just gonna put that up. Good to bring on trips to back up our NO vote reasoning.
 

Flopgut

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2005
Posts
3,627
Total Time
15k
Does anyone know if there is a third party govt/private organization that we can have monitor the voting on this? I think it might be a good idea. Everybody needs to be kept honest. Well, as honest as our mgt team and ALPA can be expected to be.

Additionally, word of warning to sUAL pilots: There is no safe haven in this scheduling section. Every pilot is basically on reserve in this deal. It will not matter how senior you are.
 

densoo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
2,054
Total Time
yes
Additionally, word of warning to sUAL pilots: There is no safe haven in this scheduling section. Every pilot is basically on reserve in this deal. It will not matter how senior you are.
The saying at CAL is that lineholders are just reserves who happen to know their trips a month in advance. Once you start a trip you belong to the man.
 

nimtz

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,442
Total Time
?
Finished reading this POS. I see ample language problems that will allow Fred's Flight Ops Team to drive a freight train through a significant portion of the work rules. Quite honestly S UAL guys that vote yes for this don't have a freaking clue how skilled S Cal management is in 'interpreting' the contract to their favor. Better get used to losing a lot of grievances you think you deserve to win.
 

jonjuan

Honey Ryder
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Posts
4,155
Total Time
3,000+
Finished reading this POS. I see ample language problems that will allow Fred's Flight Ops Team to drive a freight train through a significant portion of the work rules. Quite honestly S UAL guys that vote yes for this don't have a freaking clue how skilled S Cal management is in 'interpreting' the contract to their favor. Better get used to losing a lot of grievances you think you deserve to win.

Yep- "Crew breakfast" will be a granola bar and ONE mini bottle of water.
 

Dewey Oxberger

Any questions?
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Posts
286
Total Time
9000
"At the time of booking" will be changed to the day before your DH that's been scheduled for a month, just because I don't see any language preventing that and CAL mgt thinks the help belongs in coach. Goodbye first class! You UAL guys have to man up and vote NO on this turd or Fred and his henchmen are going to eat you all for lunch!
 

Continental

Farting on your Jumpseat
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Posts
180
Total Time
IRO
"At the time of booking" will be changed to the day before your DH that's been scheduled for a month, just because I don't see any language preventing that and CAL mgt thinks the help belongs in coach. Goodbye first class! You UAL guys have to man up and vote NO on this turd or Fred and his henchmen are going to eat you all for lunch!

Hey you better be glad we are even letting you on the plane. I pay you "less than Delta" to fly not ride.
Next contract we are going to all non-rev even for DH. If you don't get on too bad missed trip. More than 1 and your fired.

I know Christmas is coming up "you better be working over Christmas" I would really like a picture of all you pilots. That always makes me laugh.

Happy turkey day. love Jeff
 
Top