UAL furloughs and CAL hiring.
04-12-2011, 06:26 PM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Le Bus
Posts: 382
The first two B787's are also supposed to come on line in Feb of 2012, in addition to the NG's we're currently taking delivery of. At any rate, it'll take a while for the 500's to be parked. The problem with the 500's is that they are fuel pigs. They burn more than a B-737-900ER with FULL pax and fuel! The ONLY good thing about them is they have two JS's in the cockpit.
Why even begin to fall for this? It's this mentality that plays right into mngts hands.
Fuel pigs? SWA makes money with fuel pigs. Why do you suppose that is?
04-12-2011, 06:56 PM
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Keep it civil. This "my dad can beat up your dad" stuff gets everyone no where.
Focus on the JCBA. Realize the SLI will be an ass pain for all and that everyone should expect each side to take whatever advantage the arbitration board will allow to gain any possible slots in the final list.
That is the reality. Everyone has a personal vision of what their career expectations are. It may or may not match up with what the arbiter defines as your career expectation at the end of the day after trying to satisfy new an untested ALPA merger policy while adhering to precedent which by default will minimize any windfall as a matter of common law.
You guys don't have a JCBA yet. Save the SLI battles for then.
Remember, you all are on the same side just divided by separate operations/lists. Mgmt is your enemy, not the pilot with a slightly different uniform. When the SLI comes out, hopefully everyone's level of ****ed off is pretty much equal, but you have a JCBA that gives you the security and upward movement through the recapture of scope to outweigh any short term hit either side might take in the final decision.
That is where your focus should be. Anything less will negate any win in the final merging of lists when the company keeps outsourcing/downsizing your jobs.
Frats,
Lee
Focus on the JCBA. Realize the SLI will be an ass pain for all and that everyone should expect each side to take whatever advantage the arbitration board will allow to gain any possible slots in the final list.
That is the reality. Everyone has a personal vision of what their career expectations are. It may or may not match up with what the arbiter defines as your career expectation at the end of the day after trying to satisfy new an untested ALPA merger policy while adhering to precedent which by default will minimize any windfall as a matter of common law.
You guys don't have a JCBA yet. Save the SLI battles for then.
Remember, you all are on the same side just divided by separate operations/lists. Mgmt is your enemy, not the pilot with a slightly different uniform. When the SLI comes out, hopefully everyone's level of ****ed off is pretty much equal, but you have a JCBA that gives you the security and upward movement through the recapture of scope to outweigh any short term hit either side might take in the final decision.
That is where your focus should be. Anything less will negate any win in the final merging of lists when the company keeps outsourcing/downsizing your jobs.
Frats,
Lee
Last edited by APC225; 04-12-2011 at 07:23 PM.
04-12-2011, 07:56 PM
#103
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 798
Wow this has really gotten out of hand, but as a 2006 hire I can already hold 777 in EWR and 75/76 in both IAH and EWR so what new widebodies are you bringing that I cannot already hold. Our respective merger committees will go to bat for us then an arbitrator will decide, which is more than I got at TWA. Yelling on a message board may make you feel better but in the end it means nothing.
(I don't work at either company, but having been a TW guy, I cannot imagine my attitude toward seniority list integration ever tanking to this level) It's too bad AA didn't integrate you -- you'd have fit right in.
PIPE
04-12-2011, 08:08 PM
#104
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 798
And pays the crew to boot. Go figure?
Why doesn't someone go to a shareholder meeting, present the DAL SEC filings, and ask Smisek and Tilton why they are incapable of even approaching Andersen's performance?
In fact, maybe the MEC chairs should be the ones doing that. (and no, I don't work at Delta)
PIPE
Why doesn't someone go to a shareholder meeting, present the DAL SEC filings, and ask Smisek and Tilton why they are incapable of even approaching Andersen's performance?
In fact, maybe the MEC chairs should be the ones doing that. (and no, I don't work at Delta)
PIPE
04-13-2011, 06:42 AM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: B777 FO
Posts: 240
Don't speak for TWA guys like that. I would think you'd have learned a little something about how to treat people from that experience. Clearly that is not the case.
(I don't work at either company, but having been a TW guy, I cannot imagine my attitude toward seniority list integration ever tanking to this level) It's too bad AA didn't integrate you -- you'd have fit right in.
PIPE
(I don't work at either company, but having been a TW guy, I cannot imagine my attitude toward seniority list integration ever tanking to this level) It's too bad AA didn't integrate you -- you'd have fit right in.
PIPE
Lets forget the SLI stuff until we get a JCBA, then we can each go at each other going over the arbitration hearing transcripts guessing how the the final list will be decided. I will accept the arbitrated list no matter the outcome, can some of the guys on this board say the same.
04-13-2011, 07:55 AM
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
OK I'll get you guys going on this merger/integration stuff since you seem to want to huff and puff at each other.
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
04-13-2011, 07:57 AM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
"I want everyone treated fairly which is why it will go to arbitration,"
An who said the arbitrator would be fair?
Remember it is his/her opinion based on the presentations of the two parties involved and any precedents which can be defended in court.
An who said the arbitrator would be fair?
Remember it is his/her opinion based on the presentations of the two parties involved and any precedents which can be defended in court.
04-13-2011, 10:59 PM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 880
Sure.. best of of luck.. that's the ticket. You'll take that because you're on the side of a potential windfall.
What part of Smisek's statement that CAL as a stand alone carrier will eventually fail do you not comprehend? Do you really want someone to dig up that quote? I believe he said that last summer as I read the commentary on your new merger. Do you believe he said that because he was joking or just plain being disingenuous? If you step back and look at the big picture you have to come to the realization that those left without a merger partner will be at a serious competitive disadvantage. Just look at where AMR is.. rumor of a merger with USAirways??? Seriously? Do you really think AMR wants to even deal with that company and the hornet's nest that comes along with it? The rumors also abound with AK and JBLU. Even SWA, the organic growth proponent, is trying to do a deal. There are reasons..serious reasons... that all the merger chatter is occurring. If UAL decided to merge with someone (LCC) else that would have left CAL with few options. AMR? Besides the difficulty in the network overlap (e.g. NYC) how do you think you would have fared with APA? You can ask the guys at Reno Air and TWA for realistic answer. Of course the other option of going it alone brings us back to Smisek's comment last summer.
So if you want to talk about career expectations do not look backward as the crystal ball looking forward. It really is utterly irrelevant. This merger in of and itself is a windfall to you. You should take comfort that this new company will a competitive entity with a much greater chance that it survives until your retirement versus CAL alone. How much is that worth to you?
If I'm hearing you correctly you would be totally comfortable:
1) For the '99 hires at UA, most of them 45-50+ yrs old, to take the possible furlough of parking the old CAL 767-200's and the 500's after the SLI.
2) To move into the left seat of UA's fleet and more numerous widebodies for a nice 20-30 year position while the opportunity of those seats would be removed permanently for those 45-50 yr olds UA guys that would have otherwise seen them as they would have eventually made it to top of their own list sans the merger.
As a sideliner, I see a HUGE windfall for the junior CAL and SERIOUS penalty for those late '99 hire senior UA furloughee's. I would argue that even if those several hundred (and who really knows how many of them will come back) were placed ahead of the 2004/5 hires at CAL that segment of the CAL list wouldn't even notice a hickup in their progression because of the number of airplanes UA brought to the list. In fact with the additional UA aircraft your progression would still be more accelerated than it would be as a stand alone CAL carrier.
For those CAL folks who are in their 30's or younger you ALONE will completely OWN not only your fleet but UA's fleet during the last 10-20 years of your career. All those UA furloughees that you are worried about now will long gone and in a nursing home by time you reach your 60's
Now that's a pretty good windfall... don't you think? Why don't we leave the greediness label for the CEO's.
What part of Smisek's statement that CAL as a stand alone carrier will eventually fail do you not comprehend? Do you really want someone to dig up that quote? I believe he said that last summer as I read the commentary on your new merger. Do you believe he said that because he was joking or just plain being disingenuous? If you step back and look at the big picture you have to come to the realization that those left without a merger partner will be at a serious competitive disadvantage. Just look at where AMR is.. rumor of a merger with USAirways??? Seriously? Do you really think AMR wants to even deal with that company and the hornet's nest that comes along with it? The rumors also abound with AK and JBLU. Even SWA, the organic growth proponent, is trying to do a deal. There are reasons..serious reasons... that all the merger chatter is occurring. If UAL decided to merge with someone (LCC) else that would have left CAL with few options. AMR? Besides the difficulty in the network overlap (e.g. NYC) how do you think you would have fared with APA? You can ask the guys at Reno Air and TWA for realistic answer. Of course the other option of going it alone brings us back to Smisek's comment last summer.
So if you want to talk about career expectations do not look backward as the crystal ball looking forward. It really is utterly irrelevant. This merger in of and itself is a windfall to you. You should take comfort that this new company will a competitive entity with a much greater chance that it survives until your retirement versus CAL alone. How much is that worth to you?
If I'm hearing you correctly you would be totally comfortable:
1) For the '99 hires at UA, most of them 45-50+ yrs old, to take the possible furlough of parking the old CAL 767-200's and the 500's after the SLI.
2) To move into the left seat of UA's fleet and more numerous widebodies for a nice 20-30 year position while the opportunity of those seats would be removed permanently for those 45-50 yr olds UA guys that would have otherwise seen them as they would have eventually made it to top of their own list sans the merger.
As a sideliner, I see a HUGE windfall for the junior CAL and SERIOUS penalty for those late '99 hire senior UA furloughee's. I would argue that even if those several hundred (and who really knows how many of them will come back) were placed ahead of the 2004/5 hires at CAL that segment of the CAL list wouldn't even notice a hickup in their progression because of the number of airplanes UA brought to the list. In fact with the additional UA aircraft your progression would still be more accelerated than it would be as a stand alone CAL carrier.
For those CAL folks who are in their 30's or younger you ALONE will completely OWN not only your fleet but UA's fleet during the last 10-20 years of your career. All those UA furloughees that you are worried about now will long gone and in a nursing home by time you reach your 60's
Now that's a pretty good windfall... don't you think? Why don't we leave the greediness label for the CEO's.
There is no windfall for any of us. It is a forced merger that we all didn't want but needed. The industry is about mergers and we were the two that did it due to several factors. my point is that we have been given this. We will fight for our respective sides for SLI. I concur that mgmt is the greed mongers. However, no windfall for me. You are bringing planes to the fight and so are we, widebody or not. I think we will see some of the older WBs get parked or replaced with 737. Look at Cal trying to sell our 762s. How are your widebodies in comparison to these planes? Old and inefficient as well.
As for me deciding if 99 hires get furloughed or not; not my call. The arbitrators will make this call. Just as you are defending your guys based on the they where here first, I defend my position as well. What would you expect me to do? We both have vested interest. It's ok to disagree here because we will watch what the arbitrators decide. We really don't care about each other and that is ok. You fight for your team and I fight for mine. This industry is never fair. Best of luck to us all.
CitationD or old guy,
For me to say that I feel for you is not wrong in any sense. If you take offense for a fellow pilot who feels bad to see guys get used and discarded by poor and inept management, then sorry. I KNOW people that lose love ones, I KNOW watching fellow Marines getting killed, I KNOW life is full of bad and horrible things even beyond losing a job. Don't you sympathize with others that have suffered in life or is it that you don't care? I don't have to live your life to say I am sorry to hear this is happening to you and others. Get over whatever you chip you have. Take offense where offense is truly deserved.
04-14-2011, 05:47 PM
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Left Seat, Toyota Tacoma
Posts: 593
OK I'll get you guys going on this merger/integration stuff since you seem to want to huff and puff at each other.
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
04-14-2011, 05:59 PM
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 281
Whoa
OK I'll get you guys going on this merger/integration stuff since you seem to want to huff and puff at each other.
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
How should pilots be integrated on the combined seniority lists when two airlines become one?
It should have been; if the two are both represented by the same union/ALPA then DOH. This means the first airline, ALPA represented, you hired with becomes your seniority date at any ALPA represented carrier.
This means a national/global list which does not change. This "I deserve" more because "I/we fly wide bodies" (yeah you probably grew a "wide body" while doing so, hey does that count for something with the arbitrator) is a bunch of hewy. Most of us did not have the opportunity to "choose" which airline hired us. We basically went with the first one which would actually pay us to fly airplanes.
So drop the egos and "expectations." If your 2006, your 2006.
Remember the famous sage who said, "No matter where you go, there you are."
As far as fairness, that is in the beholder's eyes ... we will each see SLI fairness in a unique way. I think the outcome that will **** the least amount of folks off, and probably lead to greater unity (which will be a huge asset when we negotiate our next contract after what I fully expect to be a POS JCBA that gets ratified by 50.001%) would be status quo as far as system senoirity ... meaning that if I am 50% at CAL, I should be 50% at UCAL, I mean the UNITED. My huff and some of my puff.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
