ChrisJT6

This message just reminds me of the entire years messages and videos from the UAL MEC like the Videos with Herb starting by commenting that we really need to do everything we can to get our Furloughed pilots back on the property but then immediately follows up with passion: "but we really have to get the widebody international pay fixed", seems like the only real concern for the rulers of the UAL MEC. It's kinda like, "we will work for a fair SLI, but traditionally furloughees not on the property will be placed on the bottom" comments followed by fighting to the death over 400 pay/SLI while trying to convince the bottom 2000 of us, that will never see the 400, that this is in everyones (UAL) best interest.

The 400 was what won Delta a second slot to Haneda over United which bid a 777. The 400 has value across both oceans but to use it in such an arrogant manner with 1400+ pilots on furlough is crap.

Forget about EWR LEC Chair/bigmouth, Even if you don't agree with CAL MEC, apologize and get back to work privately and stop this 'I am taking the High Road' Public Negociating tactic while so many of us are paying a high price (massive cuts/furloughs to allow your books to look better) to allow this Merger to exist, which I doubt either party would be anytime soon getting any contractural progress from management w/o.

bearcat

+1..............

boxer6

The contradiction I see (posted earlier) leads me to be believe that it is the CAL MEC wants banding to affect SLI. That's the only explanation I see to why they wouldn't agree to the Executive resolution to have pay (JCBA) not affect SLI. Off the cuff, wouldn't more pay rates create more training events thus be manpower positive?

intrepidcv11

Yeah ALPA mastered that especially during the bankruptcies and concessions of 'The Noughties'. As a result 45%+ of all UAL domestic flying became RJ's and CAL delivers schedules worse them some regionals. Sorry if I'm unwilling to clinch my cornhole for the geriatrics this time around.

c17drivr

+2: Can't believe we hear so little of this sentiment from the junior UAL guys. They all seem to blame Tilton when their own senior guys threw them under the bus by selling away scope. If I were a junior United guy, I would be furious at my MEC for even suggesting that the senior guys (747-400) needed fences and/or special pay rates. Can't help but agree with the CAL MEC on this issue. Only so much $ to go around, so premium pay for the 747-400 will come at the expense of the rest of the fleet. The UAL play for this is a thinly veiled attempt to influence the SLI and is wasting valuable time/resources (not to mention the rift it is creating). Wendy & co need to drop this issue immediately and get to work on producing a JCBA that is in EVERYONE's best interest (not just the senior 747 drivers).

Fritzthepilot

From what I'm hearing, this is not just about banding the 777/400. There are other banding issues going on that will affect all the pilots.

ChrisJT6

Fritz,

CAL MEC Chair says in his letter today that it is about the 400/777....what other banding issues do you know of that he isn't stating? Can't even think of another banding area that would cause a huge problem?

My rich friends at UPS are shaking their heads right now!

UalHvy

OK...I'm a junior guy. I used to be on the right seat of the 747. Then 9/11 and the resulting bankruptcy. I was surplused to the 777. Then the 767/757. Then the 737. Then back up to the 757. So I know what it feels like to be crapped on in the whole process.

Tilton did what he was supposed to do. He trimmed us down and readied us for a merger. Here we are, so I'd say that he was pretty successful. And much richer because of it. Would I like to kick him in the crotch? Hell yes!

On to the -400 issue....shouldn't we be trying to get the max that we can for each aircraft and aren't we paid according to aircraft size? Banding was a concessionary give back during hard times in the industry; shouldn't we now try to get what we can out of each aircraft? The different bands recognize aircraft that are fairly close in size. Are the 777 and the 747 close in size? No, there is over a 200,000 lb. difference. The 747 carries more cargo and more people over further distances. Thus, greater economic potential for the company. Seems pretty clear cut to me, unless you throw in the possibility that the higher pay of the 747 will affect the SLI. Whether it does or not it will be up to the arbitrator so I have no way of knowing. But since that possibility exists, the UAL MEC was willing to sign paperwork agreeing that the arbitrator should NOT take that into account when determining the SLI. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Seems like the UAL MEC is willing to compromise on an issue that is very important to BOTH pilot groups. It also seems to me that the UAL MEC by offering this is trying to allay fear from the CAL MEC that it will harm the CAL group. This is, in fact, an attempt to keep the SLI separate from the JCBA, NOT to try and influence it in UAL's favor.

Even with the offer from the UAL MEC to sign an agreement that the higher pay of the 747 SHOULD NOT be used by the arbitrator the CAL MEC would not go along with the compromise.

Now, let's look at how the 747 would benefit BOTH pilot groups:

Both pilot groups would be able to fly this aircraft once the SLI is worked out at a higher pay rate.

There would be no fence.

There is a very high possibility that you would see one soon out of EWR as more capacity is already needed on your Tel Aviv flight and you have no aircraft to fly it.

There is currently no passenger airline launch customer for the 747-800. We are now the world's largest airline with an incredible frequent flyer program. Don't you think that we just may be courted by Boeing to be their launch customer? Sure would beat the A350.

There seems to be a lot of discussion on this board about one group trying to screw another. I have not missed one LEC merger meeting or normal union meeting. I have not heard one word about trying to screw the CAL guys. In fact, I have heard the opposite. We want this to work out for the benefit of all of us. The last thing I personally want to do is share a cockpit with someone that hates my guts. I'm sure that there are exceptions. I've seen it on this board. But let's try to remember, when it's all over we are going to be one pilot group. We are going to be much better off than we are today. Shouldn't we be expending our resources on getting the best overall contract?
Do we really want it to go like the USAirways merger?

chuckyt1

UalHvy,

I too am a relatively junior UAL guy and, I couldn't agree more. Banding was a concession. I asked before, and I ask again, why would any of us want to keep concessions in the new contract?

SLI and the JCBA are supposed to be separate discussions. Are they not?

ewrbasedpilot

I am SOOOO sick of all this bickering that "the 747 is this and that and this and that" CRAP. Hell, I fly a B737-900ER that holds close to 180 people. I fly three/four legs a day which computes to approximately 700+ passengers, I have to brief 15/20 flight attendants (5 or so EACH LEG), and do a HELL OF A LOT more WORK (which many of those senior guys have no clue what that is) than a B747 CA. I think I should be paid more. How's that? My God folks, enough............................