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

Unical SLI is out...

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
"In our considered judgment, both the methodology of the CAL Committee and its
resultant proposed ISL are incompatible with the revised ALPA Merger Policy. Aside
from the windfall inequities generated by using an April 1, 2013 snapshot date, total
disregard of the longevity factor cannot possibly be justified in the factual circumstances
of this case. Not surprisingly, the ISL produced by the CAL Committee's fatally defective
methodology is neither fair nor equitable."
 
trying to use a 2013 date instead of the 2010 merger date gave the cal side unrealistic expectations. if another pilot group in future hires Katz id be dumbfounded.
 
Do they talk about the decade of being forced to the bottom of the Captain list, until every SWA F.O. that is below you upgrades to seniority ahead of you ? The decade of being the junior Captain at every base in the system ? The loss of 35% seniority in exchange for the privilege of keeping the same seat ?

Too complicated for popcorn machine talk perhaps.


whats complicated is the loss of all of your 717's and getting any SWA pilot to vote yes on an SLI had we known that those airframes were going bye bye!
 
Nope, the General was right, as usual. A reasonable list was constructed using a combination of longevity and category and status, with an emphasis on category and status. You know, exactly the kind of award that scared you and the rest of SWAPA to death of arbitration.

Why didn't binding arbitration happen at Airtran? What magical powers did SWAPA have to force an agreement prior to binding arbitration?
 
This stuff really gives your self proclaimed expertise a hard on doesnt it? Must really piss you off to not be part of your beloved ALPA-

Miss it? Don't you always go around claiming that I'm some sort of ALPA national bigwig? Which is it, wavey? Can't be both.

I could say you've never argued longevity had a place in our SLI-

Actually, I argued that the list would probably come out somewhere between DOH and relative, with a bias towards relative, which is exactly what happened in the UAL/CAL case.
 
Actually, I argued that the list would probably come out somewhere between DOH and relative, with a bias towards relative, which is exactly what happened in the UAL/CAL case.

Yeah, right! :laugh:
 
In the next 5 yrs if @#$% hits the fan and the company has to furlough, it will be all the UAL guys again before a single CAL pilot will be furloughed. So as the bottom guy being a CAL dude, he basically has over 1,000 people below him for job security!!! I think that is a serious windfall for the CAL guys. It's just a matter of time till furlough #3 happens for us twice furloughed, forever $%^&#@ pilots. It was even offered by ALPA!!!
The @#$% doesn't even have to hit the fan. 250 70-seaters is a lot of seats 66% gave them to use. LCAL management doesn't grow an airline, it leans it down bit by bit. At least now it's called a holding company, not an airline. Look for less than 10,000 pilots in less than 5 years, down from the current 12,155.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top