Grumble

This is something I'm seeing more and more on the line. The company is absolutely hemorrhaging money, meanwhile LCAL and LUAL employee groups are too busy calling each other names to realize, that ship has sailed. Start working together or blast right into bankruptcy as two bickering groups.

pilot64golfer

I'm guessing the above was generated by the CAL side somewhere along the process? What's "crew news"? Unfortunately this is another skewed attempt to show that the CAL contract was brought over and we use it now.

The current contract is the UAL contract with some changes. Yes some of them came from CAL, but 90% of the contract including all the scope language was the previous UAL contract.

Just reading the first line proves it all.... "Borrowing from the legacy Continental contract, Company flying is defined to include all commercial flying of any nature “by or for” the Company or a Company affiliate."


That 1-B language is about 8 paragraphs, and looks EXACTLY like the old UAL scope. As a matter of fact I am looking at the old UAL contract and the new UAL contract and the scope language is REMARKABLY similar.

It appears they used ONE SENTENCE from the CAL contract and put it into the existing UAL contract and then told everyone that that one sentence is 1-B when in fact 1-B is about 1 1/2 pages of words.

So 1-B scope is 99% the old LUAL contract language and then you get a "crew news" that makes you think they used the CAL language for 1-B when they didn't. Just a big propaganda piece.

Think what you want, but unless you sit with both old contracts and the news one you won't get it.

pilot64golfer

Yes the $7B in cash is proof we are hemorrhaging money, plus the $700M of positive net cash flow in the 1st quarter.

That's hemorrhaging money!?

flightmedic01

Ahhh, and the dick measuring continues....

Lerxst

Nobody has said "that the CAL contract was brought over and we use it now", except you. There are some foundational pieces taken from both sides, isn't that how it's supposed to work? If you need to feel better by assigning a winner or loser to the process, (90% UAL, 10% CAL) then fine. But at least read beyond 1-B to see where some of the other things came from. (remember Aer Lingus?)

Oh, did you figure out where your critical analysis in adding up all the CAL 757 and larger aircraft(s) went wrong? It's all in the TPA, which I assure you was not written by the CAL MEC.

Airhoss

Or.......With the way this company is being run. We could be spooning and whispering sweet nothings into each others ears and we are still going to blast right back into bankruptcy.

Shrek

Ding ding ding......winner !!!

Lerxst

Brokeback Hoss, "I can't quit yooouuuuuuuu". You can leave your hat on for said spooning

Airhoss

I'll leave my hat on if you'll wear your chaps.

hopeSales

If the CAL MEC had been above board and not tried to game the system, you guys wouldn't have to defend your positions and try to prove you were equal to UAL during the initial phases of the merger. You guys lost and probably shouldn't bring up arguments from 4 years ago to try to improve your reputation.