LAX 756 now in BES

Reply Subscribe

Page 4 of 5

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-16-2013, 11:08 AM

#31

Bobine

Line Holder

Joined APC: Jul 2010

Posts: 31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony Nelson

Most don't. I find it a necessary progression by UCH. Since sUAL parked all their guppies to get the merger done, now they have to get them back in the sUAL domiciles to optimize the flying. 3,2,1 attack.....

Actually, someone failed to read the language (scope) and the company outsourced all the 737 flying to the big RJ's. Smart move on the company's part, however the parking of the aircraft had nothing to do with "getting the merger done".

01-16-2013, 11:13 AM

#32

Bobine

Line Holder

Joined APC: Jul 2010

Posts: 31

Quote:

Originally Posted by EWR73FO

We did "we" vote to give UAL pilots a larger retro check?

How did they get a larger retro check? sUAL has more pilots than sCAL, thus if you do the math, the retro amount is about the same. How each MEC divides it up is up to them.

01-16-2013, 12:53 PM

#33

EWR73FO

Banned

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Position: IAH 737 CA

Posts: 690

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobine

How did they get a larger retro check? sUAL has more pilots than sCAL, thus if you do the math, the retro amount is about the same. How each MEC divides it up is up to them.

I thought we were supposed to be united on this. JCBA, the last time I looked, meant JOINT Collective bargaining agreement. Should the lual pilots have received better rates on medical and LTD since they have more pilots?

01-16-2013, 12:55 PM

#34

Bobine

Line Holder

Joined APC: Jul 2010

Posts: 31

Quote:

Originally Posted by EWR73FO

I thought we were supposed to be united on this.

Nice play on words. Point is the retro was in equal amounts to each pilot group.

01-16-2013, 12:58 PM

#35

EWR73FO

Banned

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Position: IAH 737 CA

Posts: 690

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobine

Nice play on words. Point is the retro was in equal amounts to each pilot group.

My point, with the JCBA, is there is only ONE pilot group.

01-16-2013, 05:59 PM

#36

Dave Fitzgerald

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2012

Position: 777

Posts: 2,171

Not for another 6-9 months.

01-16-2013, 06:51 PM

#37

EWR73FO

Banned

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Position: IAH 737 CA

Posts: 690

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald

Not for another 6-9 months.

Does that mean we get to keep our CA upgrades and aircraft deliveries?

01-16-2013, 07:08 PM

#38

cadetdrivr

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Posts: 2,639

Quote:

Originally Posted by EWR73FO

Does that mean we get to keep our CA upgrades and aircraft deliveries?

Yup, and also your aircraft retirements for nearly zero net change in fleet size.

And ditto for L-UAL.

The latest update (today) indicates recalls will occur this spring @ L-UAL to cover summer flying due to retirements. Since recalls go in seniority order, this will most likely involve voluntary furloughees quitting CAL to return to their rightful seats and bases at L-UAL. Separately, L-UAL will also begin receiving 737-900ERs this year prior to "combined operations" if the SLI is even slightly delayed as expected.

01-17-2013, 12:50 AM

#39

thor2j

Banned

Joined APC: May 2010

Posts: 244

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr

Separately, L-UAL will also begin receiving 737-900ERs this year prior to "combined operations" if the SLI is even slightly delayed as expected.

I don't think this can happen as L-ual doesn't have a 737 training program setup. They were planning on using the established CAL program.

01-17-2013, 04:11 AM

#40

Probe

Don't say Guppy

Joined APC: Dec 2010

Position: Guppy driver

Posts: 1,926

Why would we need to duplicate a 737 training program for a few months? Why wouldn't UAL just subcontract this out to LCAL, including line training? Lots of the worlds airlines sub-out type ratings. I am sure we will be using CAL's SOP's anyway. Just a question.