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

UA "national seniority list"

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
I don't understand. Why would the airline hire a person with 20 years seniority to begin with? I would think they would do better to pay a recent college grad with no experience 30K a year to learn to fly and buy all of his ratings. Only prerequisite to the job would be NO seniority number.......

Am I missing something?
 
Please tell us you are joking. Top out at $85.00/ an hour? At that point the job is all yours.


look i didn't go into deep mathematical research in coming up with those numbers, i just picked two arbitrary numbers that were higher then 30 and less then 100. The point was to create at less wide ranging payscale.
Are you familiar with componding interest and that money made at the front end plus interest will make up for less money at the back end? Are you one of the individuals that instead of saving your whole life is just going to rely on your last 5 years of pay to get you through the rest of life. Some people that get hired at a major will never see the 12year scale and could care less where it tops out. This thread was created to discuss ways of lessing the blow if a change in airline was to occur and that is what my idea addresses. If you don't want to top out at $85 well then start at $30, i suggested a possiblility of choosing between 2 different scales. Now thank you for your unconstructive criticism, NEXT!
 
When in the last 25 years has the other pilot group (CAL) not been taken advantage of. Contract after contract, issue after issue, it all seems to be reactionary and behind the eight ball.

CAL is always behind the 8 ball. Always has and always will be.
 
Last edited:
Q: At CAL how many over age 60 pilots kept their jobs prior to the age 65 change?

A: Everyone management liked.

The company said the law did not apply. The union said it would study the problem. And hundreds of them kept their jobs being shuttled to training and then back. CAL even had an over 60 chief pilot who duties included flying the line but illegally kept his job when he was over 60 and the law had not changed at the time.

Every other company in America followed the law and sent their over 60 pilots golfing the day they turned 60 before the law change. CAL kept them and told the union to pack sand.

POINT BEING CAL ALPA ALWAYS FOLDS REGARDLESS OF THE ISSUE!
 
Delta PanAm?

BINGO, We have a Winner and that was quick. A Gold Star for Dan!!

Then those Pan Am guys were 'kicked in the teeth' And, the Funny thing is that even if Every Pan Am guy was at the top of the Delta list, pretty much ALL would have been GONE in a mere 2-3 yrs!!!



For what it worth.

PD

Now back to your normal, mindless FI rants.....


You are forgetting or leaving out one very important event. Delta wanted Pan Am's modern Airbus fleet and the pilots who flew them. They were uninterested in the Classic 747s and the grey beards who flew them.

Delta took pilots from the middle and bottom of the list who were, in descending order;
1. currently qualified on the A-300.
2. formerly qualified on the Airbus.
3. Already slated for training on the bus.

Reportedly, one Pan Am pilot who thought he was slated for a bus class, but was not, chained himself to a simulator. The lifeboats were pulling away.

Pan Am was going down and your Pan Am seniority was meaningless. The golden ticket to a second chance career was time on the fleet that Delta was acquiring.

Therefore merger policy would not have made that big of a difference as the Pan Am pilots who made it to Delta were not at the top of PanAm's list to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget about the PanAm pilots that got full DOH seniority at UAL when UAL bought the L1011's to get the routes! Apparently, UAL honored DOH then.
 
Pan Am L1011s?

Yes, as Eagle said, Pan Am has (11) L-1011-500s and (9) B-747SPs (think those are the right #s) that only flew the Pacific routes and all went to UAL with the routes. UAL contracted out the Mx on the 1011s and only flew them for about 1 yr. or so, until they could get 747s to replace them. UAL was always a Pratt company and hated RR (only the DC-10s and Buses don't have Pratts). A few of the PanAm -500s later ended up a DAL.

Also, Yes, those Pan Am pilots who went to UAL with the Pac. routes got DOH, as that was some years before merger policy changed. Guess UAL did not have as much 'pull' with alpa EB as DAL, or at the time, a little more respect for DOH, Longevity/Seniority, etc, or maybe they 'realized' the real Longterm value to UAL, and total UAL pilots ended up flying them anyway, once the PanAm guys were gone. Whatever 'they' want to Rant about, as one poster said earlier that DAL took the Airbii and thus 'mid level' pilots. Well, at the time, I think the 'average age' of a Pan Am pilot at the time, was like 57 1/2 yrs. old. So, senior was 'old' mid level was 'old' and for the most part junior was also 'old' Just like at UAL, most if not ALL were Gone in a few years, and others would have 'inherited' the Routes and seats anyway. But, most pilots are 'me, me, me' and 'now, now, now'

For what it worth, now Rant away guys. Bye.

PD
 

Latest resources

Back
Top