UAL proposed list online
05-15-2013, 02:46 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Sigh, where do I begin?
The whole big fuss about longevity, and then the UAL side pretty much throws it out when it disadvantages them.
Pretty ballsy to lay claim to ALL the 350's, and most of our 787's.
Ignoring the career expectations of pilots who've been flying Captain for years.
Putting furloughed pilots ahead of active pilots.
The list is really too long and I'm sure lots of guys chiming in.
But, I'm not going to pretend to be outraged like most of the UAL guys pretended to be. I'm sure rational heads will prevail and we'll see something more sensible.
The whole big fuss about longevity, and then the UAL side pretty much throws it out when it disadvantages them.
Pretty ballsy to lay claim to ALL the 350's, and most of our 787's.
Ignoring the career expectations of pilots who've been flying Captain for years.
Putting furloughed pilots ahead of active pilots.
The list is really too long and I'm sure lots of guys chiming in.
But, I'm not going to pretend to be outraged like most of the UAL guys pretended to be. I'm sure rational heads will prevail and we'll see something more sensible.
This list meets ALPA merger policy and is close to relative seniority. 06 CAL exCAPTs were not CAPTs May10 just like their SLI peers, 99 hire UAL exCAPTs.
05-15-2013, 02:46 PM
#24
Not retiring avatar
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Position: 777 CAP
Posts: 771
UA side included that in the calculation along with longevity; CAL side only included status and catagory. If you read yesterday's transcript you can see the method for the computer model and see how it was applied in today's exhibits. 50% credit for each.
In other words a furloughee got the lowest score for status and catagory because thay had none. No CAL pilot seems to disagree with that.
However they do get credit for longevity which was left out entirely by the CAL side.
05-15-2013, 02:47 PM
#25
HOSED BY PBS AGAIN
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,713
05-15-2013, 02:49 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
05-15-2013, 02:52 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
05-15-2013, 03:14 PM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 39
This is not even close to relative seniority. A pilot goes from greater than 100% (furloughed) to 75% is relative??? Ok. Is this the part where I am supposed to start spewing:
"UAL should be embarrassed by this proposal!"
"Where's the UAL outrage!"
"You're just a scab airline!"
"...bunch of snot nosed pilots who were still diapers when I was flying!"
"Longevity!"
"ALPA merger policy!"
"Burn it down if I don't get my way!"
"We have real widebodies!"
"We are a real international airline!"
"I was told at a dinner fifteen years ago that I would retire as a 747 Captain and I am entitled to that expectation! (Please ignore the realities of the last decade.)"
"But we were right sized!"
"We have a better cafeteria in our training center!"
"We don't wear hats!"
"We had better crew bases!"
"We had aircraft on order!"
"Our stripes look better!"
"I have a minor in brain surgery!"
"I can't retire #1 if the pilot ahead of me is younger than I am!"
"You were going to go bankrupt without us!"
Whatever. I've heard it all before. The l-ual team did what they were supposed to do. I'm certainly not offended (even though I would lose 13% seniority), and won't blow a head gasket over a seniority integration PROPOSAL! This whole process is smoke and mirrors with convenient semantics thrown in. It's too bad that the whole seniority list integration is being fought over battle fields that have nothing to do with pilot seniority. I've already stated, I am prepared to live the results no matter what. Are you?
"UAL should be embarrassed by this proposal!"
"Where's the UAL outrage!"
"You're just a scab airline!"
"...bunch of snot nosed pilots who were still diapers when I was flying!"
"Longevity!"
"ALPA merger policy!"
"Burn it down if I don't get my way!"
"We have real widebodies!"
"We are a real international airline!"
"I was told at a dinner fifteen years ago that I would retire as a 747 Captain and I am entitled to that expectation! (Please ignore the realities of the last decade.)"
"But we were right sized!"
"We have a better cafeteria in our training center!"
"We don't wear hats!"
"We had better crew bases!"
"We had aircraft on order!"
"Our stripes look better!"
"I have a minor in brain surgery!"
"I can't retire #1 if the pilot ahead of me is younger than I am!"
"You were going to go bankrupt without us!"
Whatever. I've heard it all before. The l-ual team did what they were supposed to do. I'm certainly not offended (even though I would lose 13% seniority), and won't blow a head gasket over a seniority integration PROPOSAL! This whole process is smoke and mirrors with convenient semantics thrown in. It's too bad that the whole seniority list integration is being fought over battle fields that have nothing to do with pilot seniority. I've already stated, I am prepared to live the results no matter what. Are you?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
