United MEC announces 100-200 Furloughee Recalls

[densoo]

This is taken directly from transition agreement Q & A.
------------------------------
7. Has a seniority list “snapshot” been taken yet and, if so, what is the date?

A: There is no single “snapshot” date used during the Seniority List Integration process; rather, there are several that will be used, with each having its own individual purpose. One date that has already been used is May 17, 2010, which is the date of the Protocol Agreement between the CAL MEC and UAL MEC (available on the Merger Committee web page). That Agreement specified the date for both Merger Committees to initially certify the specifics of each pilot group’s employment data, including the names of all pilots on each seniority list, positions held, and leaves of absence.

There will be additional “snapshots” taken during the Seniority List Integration process to account for additions to or deletions from the respective lists, especially if the integration process continues to arbitration. When we wrote the Protocol Agreement with the UAL Merger Committee, we recognized that a considerable amount of time may be needed to negotiate a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement, so we included language that requires both Merger Committees to update the lists at a time closer to mediation and/or arbitration.
------------------------------------------EOM

 

[Jetjockey]

That was the date that the front page of USA Today said that United was parking 100 airplanes to right size the airline for a merger with Continental. (editorial comment added).

Parking 100 United 737s had more to do with the hoard of 70 seaters allowed under the UAL contract.

 

[eaglesview]

I've been asking that same question and the best answer I've received is that it has not been taken yet, nor will it be announced when it will happen. I don't like the smell of that, but for now we just don't know. If it is actually taken when the merger was announced, we're talking about 147 CAL pilots and over 1430ish UAL pilots getting sorted out behind the active pilots.

You nor anyone else knows wether or not that statement is true. You are making the assumption (you know what happens when you assume) based on past practices. The arbitrator will decide.

 

[Phrogs4ever]

You nor anyone else knows wether or not that statement is true. You are making the assumption (you know what happens when you assume) based on past practices. The arbitrator will decide.

You're right, the arbitrator will decide if it comes to it. My assumptions are just that, but I haven't heard a sensible argument why it should be any other way. Do you have another scenario to offer? I'm just curious what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to justify placing furloughed pilots ahead of active line pilots of a company that is hiring.

 

[eaglesview]

You're right, the arbitrator will decide if it comes to it. My assumptions are just that, but I haven't heard a sensible argument why it should be any other way. Do you have another scenario to offer? I'm just curious what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to justify placing furloughed pilots ahead of active line pilots of a company that is hiring.

Yes I could do the gymnastics but what is the point. My opinion and your opinion don't mean a thing. It would just start a crap SLI argument that has no merit.

 

[Andy]

You're right, the arbitrator will decide if it comes to it.

The arbitrator will decide. Both MECs will want to claim that they're victims of the arbitrator's decision. And both will.

 

[xjhawk]

know the arbitrator, hate the arbitrator-I am just saying from experience. good luck guys

 

[whatitdoing?]

Who cares.....out of our hands.

 

[sniper]

i wouldn't say it's a negative spin, it's the reality of the situation. The united subsidiary is not recalling pilots; the continental subsidiary has a vacancy bid with 201 openings and the united furloughees have first dibs on hiring to fill those vacancies. That's it.

The good news is that they will receive medical benefits from day one, and starting pay will be the rate they had when they were furloughed or continental's rate based on years of service, whichever is higher. Even though they will be sitting reserve, they will be paid higher than a lot of continental fos. That's a good thing in my book. Heck, i would do it just for the 737 type rating and see what happens another benefit would be the exposure to our horrible reserve work rules so the other side knows why our exptectations of this contract are so high.

Whether they accept the offer or not has no impact on the sli whatsoever. The truth of the matter is that a senior furloughee at united would be a 737 captain at continental today, and as of right now they are still furloughed by the united subsidiary. Unless united actually recalls before the seniority snapshot is taken for sli purposes, no united pilot should be integrated ahead of any continental pilot since cal has no furloughs right now. I look back on the career paths of the group that has been furloughed twice, and i can empathize because the last ten years have been pretty $hitty for them, but the seniority list integration is not an opportunity for them to get a do-over. They are living with the choices they made, just as cal pilots hired after 2005 are living with the choices they made. Otherwise, this can turn into a usair/amwest type of fiasco and we have too much at stake with the jcba to get distracted by infighting.

i say keep both companies seperate for 5 years...let all comeback. Then date of hire combined...how about that mr?

 

[bizicmo]

i say keep both companies seperate for 5 years...let all comeback. Then date of hire combined...how about that mr?

How about keep them seperate for the next 40 years, then date of oldest sibling combined(no siblings then you get position by an independent panel based on ability to style women's hair), with option to challenge for seniority with other pilot by means of American Gladiator.

 

[Flopgut]

i say keep both companies seperate for 5 years...let all comeback. Then date of hire combined...how about that mr?

I don't think that would be too bad. As long as CAL scope prevails and longevity is factored into DOH.

 

[BID]

Parking 100 United 737s had more to do with the hoard of 70 seaters allowed under the UAL contract.

Very true

 

[Shrek]

The arbitrator will decide. Both MECs will want to claim that they're victims of the arbitrator's decision. And both will.

Wasn't there something about a panel of 3 arbitrators deciding the SLI? Did something change or did I just get it wrong?

 

[Flopgut]

Often I am accused of being too glass half full, and this is just my opinion but I am well informed.

Looking at the bid results snapshot, with even the smallest contractural improvement there is going to be huge upward mobility for everyone at this airline. I'm certainly not trying to imply that we settle for some small improvement in our contract. Not at all. What I'm saying is that both groups have gone so long without any sort of real increase, that when it happens, it's going to have huge results. CAL has only had two bids this size in the last decade, which I realize is more than UAL unfortunatly. We get scope, get the rightful retirement progression started again, and get some work rules and it should be a real breath of fresh air for everyone.

That being said, it certainly is unfortunate that this wasn't the same for UAL in the last decade. All we did at CAL was try to spread out the pain. We froze the A plan but kept scope. What the senior UAL guys did was absolutely awful (threw away scope to protect the A fund, then lost it too). We can't let those types make any more decisions. I think the UAL recalls will begin to see how much they were sold out by their senior pilots when they start to fly the line at CAL. We have plenty of problem-senior types at CAL as well, don't get me wrong. But the senior UAL pilots made unbelievably bad decisions.

 

[Phrogs4ever]

I don't think that would be too bad. As long as CAL scope prevails and longevity is factored into DOH.

If you mean longevity not counting time "hired" at CAL, then it might work. But in the end, it would be the same as relative seniority of active pilots then adding the furloughs to the bottom. I don't know how many of the furloughed pilots actually have five years of service with United.