United Airlines' First Choice: Continental

[IAHERJ]

That's fine... All airplanes on your property at the time of the merger can be fenced off. I can tell you right now that no arbitrator is going to fence off aircraft that were delivered after the merger takes place. Only existing aircraft will be kept fenced for any real length of time.

All your two year CA seats will be protected on the 737 and we'll probably have some sort of protection with our widebodys.

If you think that your "senior 9 month" FO is going to be slotted in above a 9-10 year UAL FO your crazy!

Stillflyn

Okay, our "senior 9 month fo's", who are around 98% in the company should be about 98% in a combined company. Your fo's who are at 98% should stay around 98% as well. Look, I don't see furloughs as a result of this possible merger anyway so we can all stop fighting over who is getting layed off. We should be fighting for a combined contract that pays well enough that we aren't fighting over widebody seats and commuting to each other's bases to begin with to fly them. Fences for a few years make sense as we ease into this deal but long term I think these things divide a pilot group. Any UAL pilot should be able(down the road) to have the chance to fly the 787's we are going to get as a combined airline just as much as current CAL pilots should have the opportunity to bid into a West Coast base of fly the 747 one day. Anything less is devisive and counterproductive to the overall cause.

IAHERJ
IAH B757/767

 

[General Lee]

You are once again, wrong. Carty is on record stating that the purchase of TWA will allow AA to off load some of it's ORD traffic to STL.

STL is 225 miles from ORD.

MSP is 290 mies from ORD.

History has shown that this will not stop AA from merging. Having a hub so close to ORD is not an issue for AA

Nah, you are wrong. The reason for STL was to help connect East West passengers in the case that ORD and DFW had bad wx. There is no need to have 3 hubs next to each other, in a straight line path. Nah, you are wrong, but your knowledge of the mileage is impressive....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Andy]

The biggest stumbling block (after NWA) would be the 747's. UAL/ALPA needs to protect the career projections of their pilots. I could eaisly see something like you refer to but with fences on the 747.

Why would the 747s be fenced? The 777 pay rate is the same as the 747 - and you can bet that an arbitrator is going to view them as the same.
Your comment has now ignited a mini food fight between CAL and UAL posters on this board. VERY counterproductive.

 

[Andy]

I'll tell you what. UA can keep their 747s in any merger. However, no UA can ever fly one of CAL's future 787s. Deal?

I'm willing to bet the 787s will be around a lot longer than those 747s.

Stop. The guy that posted that's not CAL or UAL. For pay purposes, there's no difference between the 747 or 777. I haven't looked at seniority for each fleet, but I suspect that it's similar enough to consider them the 'same,' just as the 757 is the 'same' as the 767.

Please don't pour gas on the fire by feeding on this stuff. We're seeing this happen with DAL and NWA. I saw it happen with UAL and USAirways.
The result is going to be long term animosity between the two pilot groups, whether we merge or not. And the likelihood of any of this fencing certain aircraft speculation coming to fruition is very small.

 

[Andy]

That's fine... All airplanes on your property at the time of the merger can be fenced off. I can tell you right now that no arbitrator is going to fence off aircraft that were delivered after the merger takes place. Only existing aircraft will be kept fenced for any real length of time.

All your two year CA seats will be protected on the 737 and we'll probably have some sort of protection with our widebodys.

If you think that your "senior 9 month" FO is going to be slotted in above a 9-10 year UAL FO your crazy!

Stillflyn

To repeat:
Please don't pour gas on the fire by feeding on this stuff. We're seeing this happen with DAL and NWA. I saw it happen with UAL and USAirways.
The result is going to be long term animosity between the two pilot groups, whether we merge or not. And the likelihood of any of this fencing certain aircraft speculation coming to fruition is very small.

 

[Uniform Shop]

That's fine... All airplanes on your property at the time of the merger can be fenced off. I can tell you right now that no arbitrator is going to fence off aircraft that were delivered after the merger takes place. Only existing aircraft will be kept fenced for any real length of time.

All your two year CA seats will be protected on the 737 and we'll probably have some sort of protection with our widebodys.

If you think that your "senior 9 month" FO is going to be slotted in above a 9-10 year UAL FO your crazy!

Stillflyn

How about a 2 1/2 year FO? :beer:

 

[Andy]

Okay, our "senior 9 month fo's", who are around 98% in the company should be about 98% in a combined company. Your fo's who are at 98% should stay around 98% as well. Look, I don't see furloughs as a result of this possible merger anyway so we can all stop fighting over who is getting layed off. We should be fighting for a combined contract that pays well enough that we aren't fighting over widebody seats and commuting to each other's bases to begin with to fly them. Fences for a few years make sense as we ease into this deal but long term I think these things divide a pilot group. Any UAL pilot should be able(down the road) to have the chance to fly the 787's we are going to get as a combined airline just as much as current CAL pilots should have the opportunity to bid into a West Coast base of fly the 747 one day. Anything less is devisive and counterproductive to the overall cause.

IAHERJ
IAH B757/767

Thanks; my sentiments also.

Comments on webboards can escalate to isolated jumpseat denials when it gets out of hand; silly, but it's happened in the past. I'm waiting for the day that we read a NWA/DAL jumpseat denial thread. I don't want to read a CAL/UAL jumpseat denial thread.

Each employee group has hot button items; it would be nice if we could refrain from pushing them.

 

[catIIIc]

Amen Andy all this does is drive a wedge between two pilot groups that could be working together instead of against each other. If this does happed let your merger committee do the work and if not an arbitrator, that is the way it supposed to work. Just remember unless you are #1 on the list you will feel you were screwed.

 

[lookin4better]

The scope issue, or lack of would hopefully be fixed before these 2 link up.....no more RJ flying and quick upgrades at the expense of mainline pilot jobs

 

[G4G5]

Really? Are you sure about that? Everyone who I have talked to, and I was not at Delta at the time, says we overpaid thanks to a runup from AA. Ron Allen supposedly overpaid a lot for the routes and terminals. I think your figure is a lot low. Let's ask Tom Goodman, he was there I bet. $260 million is low. I heard it was over $1 billion.


Bye Bye--General Lee

You are correct, I was wrong. I wrote $260 million when in fact it was $620 mill in cash paid directly to the creditors.

Even at your $ one billion dollar estimates, DAL received more then fair compensation. Where would all of their current international expansion be without the Pan Am purchase? Or 45 aircraft or the Shuttle?

It was the deal that put DAL on the map.

 

[G4G5]

I'll tell you what. UA can keep their 747s in any merger. However, no UA can ever fly one of CAL's future 787s. Deal?

I'm willing to bet the 787s will be around a lot longer than those 747s.

It's apparent that you ave never lived through a merger, size matters.

As for the 787, any arbitrator will group it in with the 767 based on size, weight and number of pax. Arbitrators don't care if it's new and shiney. In fact neither should you, the bottom line is the $$$ (pay rate) and the 787 will pay the same as a 767 not a 747.

 

[justin15e]

It's apparent that you ave never lived through a merger, size matters.

As for the 787, any arbitrator will group it in with the 767 based on size, weight and number of pax. Arbitrators don't care if it's new and shiney. In fact neither should you, the bottom line is the $$$ (pay rate) and the 787 will pay the same as a 767 not a 747.

From the current CAL contract:

"Widebody aircraft are: B787, B777, B747, B767, MD11, DC10, L1011, A300,​

A330, and A340. This is shown on a pilot’s pay screen as A."

When your done measuring the size of your plane, you can come back and re-enter the conversation.

We don't split up 767 and 777/747 like you might at UA. Before you speak like your a know-it-all, get your facts straight.

 

[Andy]

From the current CAL contract:

"Widebody aircraft are: B787, B777, B747, B767, MD11, DC10, L1011, A300,​

A330, and A340. This is shown on a pilot’s pay screen as A."

When your done measuring the size of your plane, you can come back and re-enter the conversation.

We don't split up 767 and 777/747 like you might at UA. Before you speak like your a know-it-all, get your facts straight.

G4G5's NOT with UAL. He's an AMR furloughee flying G5s. He is merely citing his opinon on where the 787 is going to fall in the eyes of an arbiter.
You need to cut back on the caffeine.

 

[PHXFLYR]

Please, no. United screwed away its reputation and stature and now wants to rebuild it by merging with a company that has some.

Sorta like Continental in the mid to late 80's...How soon we forget.

PHXFLYR

 

[Andy]

Sorta like Continental in the mid to late 80's...How soon we forget.

PHXFLYR

Funny, UAL's reputation was fine when he applied.
http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=1508654#post1508654

You don't suppose Bigoober got a rejection letter from UAL?
No worries though; he should be starting with CAL soon. http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=1517084#post1517084

So I'm sure there's absolutely no prejudice in his post. uke:

 

[leftcoast]

Ewr, Iah, Cle--gag

Sorry Andy-I rarely post as you can see but I must disagree here. If I'd wanted to fly out of any of CAL's garden spots, I would have applied there.

UAL pilots should get some consideration for the fact that CAL's bases are generally undesireable (understatement) while UAL's are where people want to live.

Relative seniority would not protect us from the CAL hoards coming West. High fences will.

 

[saabservant]

I'll be leaving my regional in a few weeks to start at United. Staying at a regional seems less wise than starting over, even with furlough potential.
I'm hoping that whatever helps the carrier survive recession and high oil prices is a good thing, even merger.
It seems the nwa/delta guys are talking again, the benefits (contract improvements, security) of a merger are too apparent to walk away from because of petty issues. What good is retaining your wide-body seniority if your carrier goes into bankruptcy again?
Should ual and continental move forward, please think of the welfare of ALL pilots, not just your own...

 

[sleeves]

I don't think that there will be many pushing for DOH at UAL. I haven't seen anyone suggest that on our ALPA boards. We went through that with USAirways in 2000 and are now the senior pilots DOH-wise compared to CAL.
Some have suggested tall fences, as what happened with NWA/Republic. I oppose fences because it will create too many barriers within the pilot group.
I would be very disappointed with UAL ALPA if they did not propose a reasonable seniority integration from the start. To do otherwise sets the pilots up for unrealistic expectations.
In my case, I'd benefit greatly from DOH; I was hired at UAL in 2000. I don't expect to see my relative seniority change by more than +/- a couple of percent.

I hope that a merger does not occur, but if one were to occur with United, I'd hope it to be with CAL. It makes the most sense in terms of route structures. There is not a great deal of overlap which would mean less cutbacks.

I could not have said it any better myself. I am at CAL and hope "we stay the course" but if we have to merge hopefully there are others like us.

 

[Andy]

Sorry Andy-I rarely post as you can see but I must disagree here. If I'd wanted to fly out of any of CAL's garden spots, I would have applied there.

UAL pilots should get some consideration for the fact that CAL's bases are generally undesireable (understatement) while UAL's are where people want to live.

Relative seniority would not protect us from the CAL hoards coming West. High fences will.

You didn't list Guam.

I'm not a fan of fences. Just spend some time with senior NWA pilots. You'll get an earful about the NWA/Republic merger way back in 1986. 22 years later, and 2 years after the fences came down.

I like UAL's domiciles better, but would probably go for IAH due to lower cost of living. I would think that there'd be movement from both sides to the other domiciles. In all, it'd probably be a wash.

 

[Andy]

I'll be leaving my regional in a few weeks to start at United. Staying at a regional seems less wise than starting over, even with furlough potential.

Good luck to ya; when do you start at TK? I'll be there on 14 April for a week and a half; then back at the end of April for 4 weeks of 767 training.

I'm sure a lot went into your decision. Just make sure to have other plans in case you get furloughed. In the long run, I think that you'll be happier with coming to United.
United's also been undermanned for quite a while and the contract allows for the company to build lines down to 65 hours; I think that they'll use this option before any furloughs. With many pilots flying 89/95, there's a lot of reductions that can be made prior to furloughing.