Weak L-UAL pilots

[chppr5]

Should have just started with 744 and 777 banding. We saw it as a grab and made you pay for it. Banding was not going anywhere btw, we have done it for a long time. We didn't just dream it up to hurt you.

I'll let you in on a secret. Or at least something you don't realize. In this Mexican standoff we have here, there is indeed a kinship that exists that UAL pilots are not part of. See, we all know what you really wish you could do to us. We know you would prefer to be wearing screw CAL pins and laughing at us as you explain we are all about to lose everything. Cause you would rather not even staple us; You'd rather see us out of work with no income and no insurance. You had a lot bigger audience with a lot longer memory than you thought when you trashed Frontier pilots lives in Denver. I'm sorry it's getting a lot of junior UAL pilots caught up in it, but your 570s and 539s called down the thunder. The good news is: It won't be that bad. No one is looking for actual revenge. It just factors in and stays in the background.

Wow, you figured it out...You saw right thru us.....You are definitely out there. So I guess if we think along the same lines as you do, we should lump you all in with the scabs? I guess all rational debating is done here. Funny though, you never stated when we rear ended you, when we stalled the process, when we didn't have your back. I guess your attacks and conspiracy theories are a diversionary tactic. The silence is still deafening....

 

[Yuppyguppy]

So your 737 orders aren't enough? The T&PA language isn't worth fighting for? You'd rather sign an agreement that might lack in QOL to the point we all end up with junior looking schedules, and that farms out huge amounts of flying to RJs? Haven't you guys done enough of that?

BTW: I'm IAH based and from where I sit you've harvested some of our very best flying and wrecked our best BES. Not because we were lacking the right equipment. Our 762s and 764s make better choice for etops. Your 763s are such clunkers the company doesn't want them out of sight of land!

How many widebody aircraft did CAL have before the merger? Was it 16 oh wait 34 widebodies? Now your bitching? Shut up wimp! Fred and his friends like Lorenzo will not be getting our rightful flying like you and your senior pilots did to Eastern. Also there is NO guarantee those 737s are coming to LUAL if the TPA expires. But we won't be letting that happen with our YES vote!

 

[Flopgut]

The silence is still deafening....

Then you must already be deaf

 

[Yuppyguppy]

What, if any, provisions of the TPA expire in the event the TA is not ratified?

The company would be able to terminate 4-D Domiciles, 7-A s-UAL Furlough, 7-C Flying ratios, 7-D Base protections, and 9.


Like CAL would not just come in and harvest more flying. MY A$$!

 

[Flopgut]

How many widebody aircraft did CAL have before the merger? Was it 16 oh wait 34 widebodies? Now your bitching? Shut up wimp! Fred and his friends like Lorenzo will not be getting our rightful flying like you and your senior pilots did to Eastern. Also there is NO guarantee those 737s are coming to LUAL if the TPA expires. But we won't be letting that happen with our YES vote!

I'd have been perectly happy keeping what I had. Unfortunately, it got leverged for your sake.

 

[Continental]

How many widebody aircraft did CAL have before the merger? Was it 16 oh wait 34 widebodies? Now your bitching? Shut up wimp! Fred and his friends like Lorenzo will not be getting our rightful flying like you and your senior pilots did to Eastern. Also there is NO guarantee those 737s are coming to LUAL if the TPA expires. But we won't be letting that happen with our YES vote!

I glad my "No" vote cancels your weak yes vote

 

[Flopgut]

What, if any, provisions of the TPA expire in the event the TA is not ratified?

The company would be able to terminate 4-D Domiciles, 7-A s-UAL Furlough, 7-C Flying ratios, 7-D Base protections, and 9.


Like CAL would not just come in and harvest more flying. MY A$$!

Come on! I think we've both made the point that each airline has cross mingled into each other's flying, right?

Are you absolutely sure you have to buy into this fear you've got? Our guys feel strongly that it only required a TA, not a ratification (and we actually win arbitrations). Your guys are being nebulous and scared. Yeah, ok, we have less to lose (really?!) so don't belive me. Contact your reps (and your MC) with this question: The NMB has said they will NOT allow a status quo change. Does that not mean the T&PA will be extended? Remember, eventually Lorenzo got banned from the airline business. The NMB will be a backstop to this deal going like EAL.

 

[LXApilot]

How about objecting to pay banding just based on the Weight/Pay productivity scale from the Kelly Act? Read Joe Doniac's article from ALPA magazine from last Spring for an explanation. Remember that this is what contract 2000 was based on.

 

[chppr5]

I would say that begrudging us our effort to get PS last year was a bit excessive. Additionally, I think to insist on 70% of the 450 million was as well. These are things we should have been more together on that are not JP's fault. You probably have not handled JP too well, but you're also guilty of capitulating to JH. He's got an agenda and it only includes his needs. You of all people should see this.

OK, I'll try this one more time then I'm out.
- We were not begrudging you PS. We, UALMC and CALMC, were trying to use the leverage, of not paying you PS and the ensuing LCAL melt down on FEB 14th 2012, to expand and extend the T&PA provisions (which would have taken one of the fears out of the equation now). Then your MC (and his cozy relationship with Abbott) went and settled a $100K grievance for $40M (at the expense of LUAL).

-The $450M was reduced to $400M (by UCH's last offer). The percentage of the distribution was the original agreement between JH,JP and UCH using the DAL differential from 2009-2012. This was NOT a lump sum distribution as you want to believe. This was RETRO!!!!!! 90% retro as of 08/01/12!!!!Agreed to BY JP and JH!!!! LUAL got the bigger % because the LUAL/DAL differential was larger than the LCAL/DAL differential AND LUAL had more pilots. It had NOTHING to do with LUAL just wanting more just because!!!!!!

I guess revisionist history is the word of the day. The more I go back and forth with you the more I understand the yes voters. (just vote yes to get rid of the LCAL influence) Thankfully I have some good friends over there that are logical and their opinions are formed with facts and not revisionist history.

 

[Flopgut]

How about objecting to pay banding just based on the Weight/Pay productivity scale from the Kelly Act? Read Joe Doniac's article from ALPA magazine from last Spring for an explanation. Remember that this is what contract 2000 was based on.

Are we all not pretty much done with ALPA after this?

-The $450M was reduced to $400M (by UCH's last offer). The percentage of the distribution was the original agreement between JH,JP and UCH using the DAL differential from 2009-2012. This was NOT a lump sum distribution as you want to believe. This was RETRO!!!!!! 90% retro as of 08/01/12!!!!Agreed to BY JP and JH!!!! LUAL got the bigger % because the LUAL/DAL differential was larger than the LCAL/DAL differential AND LUAL had more pilots. It had NOTHING to do with LUAL just wanting more just because!!!!!!

Ok, I'll admit that's the first I've heard it explained that way.

Help me understand something. 30,000 ft view: In the past, if you brought more to a merger it meant you got more. Or that you at least kept more of what you brought. (That was most certainly the past UAL ALPA viewpoint) Why is it now that by bringing more to this merger, we should get less? This $400 million is sort of a good example. We get less because we have more?! I've heard claims that you guys want some extra $ because we have a frozen A plan. Seriously. Flip that around and look at the claim that your lower paying airplanes should equate to you doing better in SLI?! Which is it? You want more of the $400 million because you made less, but we don't account for W2 on SLI? I think you'll look back on this and see that if it appeared JP flipped around on some issues, it was because of this disparity. What say you?

 

[chppr5]

Are we all not pretty much done with ALPA after this?



Ok, I'll admit that's the first I've heard it explained that way.

Help me understand something. 30,000 ft view: In the past, if you brought more to a merger it meant you got more. Or that you at least kept more of what you brought. (That was most certainly the past UAL ALPA viewpoint) Why is it now that by bringing more to this merger, we should get less? This $400 million is sort of a good example. We get less because we have more?! I've heard claims that you guys want some extra $ because we have a frozen A plan. Seriously. Flip that around and look at the claim that your lower paying airplanes should equate to you doing better in SLI?! Which is it? You want more of the $400 million because you made less, but we don't account for W2 on SLI? I think you'll look back on this and see that if it appeared JP flipped around on some issues, it was because of this disparity. What say you?

Why do you continue to infuse other aspects into the retro argument. it's just RETRO, has nothing to do with what either side brought to the table, it should have nothing to do with the SLI argument. It was agreed to by the JNC, UALMC and the CALMC that they were going to negotiate for FULL retro back at the beginning of Joint negotiations. If they decided to negotiate for a signing bonus then this would be as you say, divided among the pilots. Your EWR reps insisted that they were going to bring the group FULL RETRO, your MC kept saying FULL RETRO (I heard him with my own ears at the joint MC's road show) . The proposals the JNC passed across the table to UCH said RETRO. This has been negotiated as retro since the summer of 2010. The agreed upon distribution by JH, JP and UCH was 90% retro as of Aug 1 2012 based upon the DAL differential. Then the flip flop with JP occurred in Sept 2012. Just because it's not FULL retro does not make it a lump sum it's still retro. It's pretty obvious from the outset that the LUAL group was going to get more, our pay rates were less than yours, simple math. I'm sorry, if we were negotiating for a signing bonus from the beginning of joint negotiations then I would whole heartedly agree with you.

 

[dicko]

Tough spot you're all in.

If only both pilot groups belonged to the same National union, with the ability to lead and coordinate the fight for a contract. Wouldn't that be something.

 

[Flopgut]

Why do you continue to infuse other aspects into the retro argument. it's just RETRO, has nothing to do with what either side brought to the table, it should have nothing to do with the SLI argument. It was agreed to by the JNC, UALMC and the CALMC that they were going to negotiate for FULL retro back at the beginning of Joint negotiations. If they decided to negotiate for a signing bonus then this would be as you say, divided among the pilots. Your EWR reps insisted that they were going to bring the group FULL RETRO, your MC kept saying FULL RETRO (I heard him with my own ears at the joint MC's road show) . The proposals the JNC passed across the table to UCH said RETRO. This has been negotiated as retro since the summer of 2010. The agreed upon distribution by JH, JP and UCH was 90% retro as of Aug 1 2012 based upon the DAL differential. Then the flip flop with JP occurred in Sept 2012. Just because it's not FULL retro does not make it a lump sum it's still retro. It's pretty obvious from the outset that the LUAL group was going to get more, our pay rates were less than yours, simple math. I'm sorry, if we were negotiating for a signing bonus from the beginning of joint negotiations then I would whole heartedly agree with you.

Ok. So far we've just discussed "retro" (not the term I see). And we've rehashed the 744 and pay banding. And we touched on the fact that you're getting twice the raise we are. I see where you're coming from, I don't fully agree, but I understand your point. My question is: what do we get? Anything? Nothing? You seem fairly level headed, are we suppose to be happy with dry cleaning?

 

[CEO silly sap]

Tough spot you're all in.

If only both pilot groups belonged to the same National union, with the ability to lead and coordinate the fight for a contract. Wouldn't that be something.

IMAGINE, pilots actually helping themselves and working together.


Best Quote of this entire thread, " OUR FLYING", really and you own the airline? Oh thats right you bought it from Steven Wolf....nice job.

 

[chppr5]

Ok. So far we've just discussed "retro" (not the term I see). And we've rehashed the 744 and pay banding. And we touched on the fact that you're getting twice the raise we are. I see where you're coming from, I don't fully agree, but I understand your point. My question is: what do we get? Anything? Nothing? You seem fairly level headed, are we suppose to be happy with dry cleaning?

That's for you to decide. I just wanted to put to bed the perception of a weak LUAL group. Some have negotiating fatigue, tired of negotiating with two other parties when it should be one. I will vote on the merits of the TA, no outside influence, the here and now. Gook luck to us all....We'll need it.