Who's Flying Your Airplane? NO OUTSOURCING

[SuperFLUF]

You're absolutely right, they're going to just cut a check to each of the 70+ seaters and say "thanks for your service." I don't know how much money United-Continental has in the bank, but I would bet they don't want to spend any fraction of it paying early termination fees to Skywest Inc, Republic Holdings, Trans States Holdings, or Mesa Holdings.

...and they're not just going to cut a check to give us the 50% raise in total compensation that we seek either.

They only way they do it is if they cost of not doing it is greater.

And don't give me that "they can't afford it" bs, they just gave themselves 150% increases right off the bat. Who knows what sort of increase they'll get next year. And pre-paying 175 million dollar loans 13 years early....... the list goes on.

I'm not talking about demanding money that's not there. I'm talking about driving a hard bargain. Management never fails to play their role at the negotiating table, yet time and time again the pilots don't play theirs. Its not personal, its business.

 

[doh]

You're absolutely right, they're going to just cut a check to each of the 70+ seaters and say "thanks for your service." I don't know how much money United-Continental has in the bank, but I would bet they don't want to spend any fraction of it paying early termination fees to Skywest Inc, Republic Holdings, Trans States Holdings, or Mesa Holdings.

I might be missing something here, but aren't they negotiating to move flying in house as contracts with feeders expire? Why would they have to cut a big check?

 

[Cpt Oveur]

If they were to terminate the contract early, like as soon as the merger was complete. Thats what I meant

 

[Flopgut]

Doesn't it sound more likely that this phased withdrawal of United Express carriers would come as the result of not granting any new contracts, and not extending any of the current contracts?

CAL pilots held the scope line, and it has been no easy task. They are an example many of us should look to. The UAL pilots, hate to say it, but have a small responsibility to it. It's not their demise, and it can be something they can and will overcome. The blame game only points to things done in the past. If you want to get the flying back on property, isn't is more realistic to work with them, phasing their planes on to the mainline property, perhaps their pilots/flight attendants/mechanics as well?

If we [CAL] can hold the line on scope and get the 70 seat airplanes back to mainline perhaps some form of ALPA fragmentation policy could provide for a mainline transition for the pilots flying them? (Except for the non-ALPA types) But then again, why support that sort of thing?! I wish it were part of the discussion, but we can't even suggest that maybe Skywest and Shuttle consider not participating in blatantly violating our legal contract! How are you suppose to "work with" that type pilot?

 

[BobbyBiplane]

If we [CAL] can hold the line on scope and get the 70 seat airplanes back to mainline perhaps some form of ALPA fragmentation policy could provide for a mainline transition for the pilots flying them? (Except for the non-ALPA types) But then again, why support that sort of thing?! I wish it were part of the discussion, but we can't even suggest that maybe Skywest and Shuttle consider not participating in blatantly violating our legal contract! How are you suppose to "work with" that type pilot?

Idiot

 

[Raoul Duke]

You know not of what you speak.

The arbitration that will take place over the violation of CAL's scope clause is not binding. It is just expedited arbitration. An arbitrator is not a judge. Because of CAL mgmt's crafty wording of their "interpretation" of the contract this is categorized as a minor dispute and must be arbitrated before it goes to court.

You need to go and brush up on how the RLA works. You are correct that it is a minor dispute. You are not correct that if a party loses an arbitration they can just go to court. It does not work like that. Review of arbitration decisions are extremely limited (which will almost certainly not apply in this instance).

 

[Flopgut]

Idiot

Read a few of your posts. You're a real genius. Go to hell clown.

 

[777forever]

So CAL/UAL pilots will negotiate to slowly transition flying back to mainline? Man there are some long term contracts still left of the table. Management ask for something steep in return for such a task, and what will pilots give up in return? You can kiss any chance of a decent payraise and workrules(which you guys BADLY need) goodbye. I mean, its just embarrassing what legacy pilots make compared to SWA.

 

[doh]

If they were to terminate the contract early, like as soon as the merger was complete. Thats what I meant

That would be strictly a company decision since the pilots are not asking for that.

 

[doh]

So CAL/UAL pilots will negotiate to slowly transition flying back to mainline? Man there are some long term contracts still left of the table. Management ask for something steep in return for such a task, and what will pilots give up in return? You can kiss any chance of a decent payraise and workrules(which you guys BADLY need) goodbye. I mean, its just embarrassing what legacy pilots make compared to SWA.

Actually, they shouldn't give up a thing. There is pressure on management to get the merger completed from the stockholders. Management also can't cash in until the deal is done. As you say, there are some long term contracts still out there, so management can plan and ease into the transition. That also gives the pilots at the feeder time to get their ducks in a row to apply for the added positions mainline will need to fill.