Rebuttal Hearings - Day 1
06-13-2013, 08:43 AM
#51
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Very good point and something I've actually agreed with~
(probably going to get me in hot water with my fellow CAL guys)
In a perfect world, the top would be Ultra Long Haul Widebody flying. Next would be Long Haul Widebody flying. After that, it's a wash between domestic Widebody flying and International Narrowbody flying.
The real question is which is better-
A bunch of Widebody's doing Long Haul/International Flying or two to three times as many Narrowbody aircraft doing the same.
From a pilot income point, Widebodies doing Long Haul/International flying is (probably) going to pay more and will mean more days off..
But from a manpower standpoint, if you have 3x as many Narrowbody aircraft doing International Flying, you (probably) need more pilots.
And therein lies the dilemma. What's more important.
1000 guys making very high pay or
2000 guys making somewhat less pay?
Depends on where you sit on the list! LOL
Either way, the Arbitrators do NOT have an easy job here. But either way, in a few months it (should) be over~
Motch
PS> It would be interesting to see how much flying is done (on both sides) that is-
Ultra Long Haul (4 man crew)
Long Haul (3 man crew)
International (2 man crew)
Can you LUAL guys tell me which 747 routes are ULH and not flown by anyone else using a triple 7. Kuwait and Sydney come to mind.
(probably going to get me in hot water with my fellow CAL guys)
In a perfect world, the top would be Ultra Long Haul Widebody flying. Next would be Long Haul Widebody flying. After that, it's a wash between domestic Widebody flying and International Narrowbody flying.
The real question is which is better-
A bunch of Widebody's doing Long Haul/International Flying or two to three times as many Narrowbody aircraft doing the same.
From a pilot income point, Widebodies doing Long Haul/International flying is (probably) going to pay more and will mean more days off..
But from a manpower standpoint, if you have 3x as many Narrowbody aircraft doing International Flying, you (probably) need more pilots.
And therein lies the dilemma. What's more important.
1000 guys making very high pay or
2000 guys making somewhat less pay?
Depends on where you sit on the list! LOL
Either way, the Arbitrators do NOT have an easy job here. But either way, in a few months it (should) be over~
Motch
PS> It would be interesting to see how much flying is done (on both sides) that is-
Ultra Long Haul (4 man crew)
Long Haul (3 man crew)
International (2 man crew)
Can you LUAL guys tell me which 747 routes are ULH and not flown by anyone else using a triple 7. Kuwait and Sydney come to mind.
06-13-2013, 08:48 AM
#52
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Correct.
However, let's be honest. For many pilots, it is going to be close to their "relative" seniority.
Hell, if we both had not had furloughs, and assuming (hate to use that word..) similar DOH, it would almost match "relative" seniority.
With no LUAL Furloughs, I would have expected to be matched with the guys I use to fly with at my old job (Trans States), who went to United when I went to Continental. But that also assumes (again!) alot.. we both have "growth" aircraft on order, we are both receiving new gen aircraft at the time, and we both have retirements going on.
Unfortunately, that was and is not the case. Which is why the Arbitrators have such a tough job.
In my opinion... both "proposed" lists aren't going to fly. And they probably shouldn't.
[personally, on one list I'm senior to guys hired in 97 at UAL, on the other I'm junior to United pilots who are currently furloughed, and have not been recalled to LUAL. Neither one is fair & just, in my opinion]
We'll know more after next week. And come end of Aug we will be able to have a whole new debate as to the reason why the list is what it is!
Motch
However, let's be honest. For many pilots, it is going to be close to their "relative" seniority.
Hell, if we both had not had furloughs, and assuming (hate to use that word..) similar DOH, it would almost match "relative" seniority.
With no LUAL Furloughs, I would have expected to be matched with the guys I use to fly with at my old job (Trans States), who went to United when I went to Continental. But that also assumes (again!) alot.. we both have "growth" aircraft on order, we are both receiving new gen aircraft at the time, and we both have retirements going on.
Unfortunately, that was and is not the case. Which is why the Arbitrators have such a tough job.
In my opinion... both "proposed" lists aren't going to fly. And they probably shouldn't.
[personally, on one list I'm senior to guys hired in 97 at UAL, on the other I'm junior to United pilots who are currently furloughed, and have not been recalled to LUAL. Neither one is fair & just, in my opinion]
We'll know more after next week. And come end of Aug we will be able to have a whole new debate as to the reason why the list is what it is!
Motch
I can certainly understand the consternation on the LCAL part with regards to where the LUAL furloughees end up. Same as the consternation is valid on the LUAL side for LCAL wanting to use Express time Longevity. I surely agree that I would NOT want to be the arbitrator. My hope for this process is that the final list is fair enough to both sides that there might be grumbling (I'm sure there will be), but that we all just move on and avoid a USAirways
06-13-2013, 08:48 AM
#53
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Actually LAX Pilot..
He "Choose" to become a Captain in 07. But he may have had the "Right" to become a Captain earlier.
Honest question-
When did the LUAL 97 hires have the ability to "choose" to be Captains?
And do they currently have that same opportunity.
(Bad questions.. as I beleive that a 97 hire at LUAL currently can NOT hold the Left seat.)
Motch.
PS> Seriously, all this hatred of JP and most things Continental can not be good for your health.
Then again, as you're going to be senior to me.. have at it!
LOL Just Kidding~ Stay healthy and Thirsty.
He "Choose" to become a Captain in 07. But he may have had the "Right" to become a Captain earlier.
Honest question-
When did the LUAL 97 hires have the ability to "choose" to be Captains?
And do they currently have that same opportunity.
(Bad questions.. as I beleive that a 97 hire at LUAL currently can NOT hold the Left seat.)
Motch.
PS> Seriously, all this hatred of JP and most things Continental can not be good for your health.
Then again, as you're going to be senior to me.. have at it!
LOL Just Kidding~ Stay healthy and Thirsty.
06-13-2013, 08:52 AM
#54
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Only question will be, what sort of restrictions and what type of medical?
Can someone fly as a Professional pilot at age 65-67? Sure. But not everyone, and not at a typical schedule.
Just my opinion and I hope I'm wrong on this one.. but the trend may be there.
Motch
06-13-2013, 09:11 AM
#55
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
The difference is our Committees facts are facts...yours conveniently leave out facts that don't support your claims.
And yet his longevity is still worth twice that of a similar hire date UAL pilot.
Life is full of unexpected circumstances, you will be where you will be, you will more than likely move up some from that position some but don't expect a windfall.
Never implied you were, far from it, but in some form of denial? Absolutely! You and some of your peers categorically fail to even recognize a single attribute that CAL brought to this merger. That mindset will be the catalyst to your epic displeasure of the outcome of ISL.
And yet his longevity is still worth twice that of a similar hire date UAL pilot.
Life is full of unexpected circumstances, you will be where you will be, you will more than likely move up some from that position some but don't expect a windfall.
Never implied you were, far from it, but in some form of denial? Absolutely! You and some of your peers categorically fail to even recognize a single attribute that CAL brought to this merger. That mindset will be the catalyst to your epic displeasure of the outcome of ISL.
You don't think that LCAL has been leaving out "facts" to make their position look better? Puh-LEASE. I've read every word of the transcripts and lets just say I don't see it the way you are presenting.
I've been in this business long enough to not need a lesson from you about "life circumstances". I don't want, need, or expect a windfall. I want a fair solution. And the LCAL proposal is MUCH further from a fair, ALPA merger policy based, solution than the LUAL proposal.
In no way, shape, or form do I fail to recognize what LCAL brought it the merger, so don't make assumptions about what I believe. Personally, I have no interest in the 737, EWR, IAH, CLE, or GUM, but its not about me. It's about the network. And the Latin America operation, Atlantic presence, and New York fortress are VERY valuable. I will also say that almost every CAL pilot I've met has been very pleasant, and I'm looking forward to flying with them. I think the snarky comments by many LUAL pilots on this forum are out of line and short sighted. Frankly, it's why I almost never post on here anymore. There are plenty of LCAL pilots who also fit in this posting category unfortunately.
If LUAL wanted a windfall, and recognized zero value of what LCAL brings to the merger as you suggest, we would have asked for a staple job. The only staple job I've seen is on the LCAL proposed list where they staple every 1997 and junior pilot whether they were ever furloughed or not. Much like his DAL proposal (which was adopted by the arbitration board), the LUAL lawyer put forth the list he thinks should actually be adopted. It's 2 different strategies. Katz went for the weeds and hopes to meet in the middle. Freund puts out what he thinks/hopes he can actually get because in his estimation the arbitrators don't have the time/desire to build their own list. They will probably adopt one and make minor adjustments. Time will tell. But in the last two major mergers, Freund's proposal was adopted. Will it this time? Beats me.
06-13-2013, 09:13 AM
#56
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Actually LAX Pilot..
He "Choose" to become a Captain in 07. But he may have had the "Right" to become a Captain earlier.
Honest question-
When did the LUAL 97 hires have the ability to "choose" to be Captains?
And do they currently have that same opportunity.
(Bad questions.. as I beleive that a 97 hire at LUAL currently can NOT hold the Left seat.)
Motch.
PS> Seriously, all this hatred of JP and most things Continental can not be good for your health.
Then again, as you're going to be senior to me.. have at it!
LOL Just Kidding~ Stay healthy and Thirsty.
He "Choose" to become a Captain in 07. But he may have had the "Right" to become a Captain earlier.
Honest question-
When did the LUAL 97 hires have the ability to "choose" to be Captains?
And do they currently have that same opportunity.
(Bad questions.. as I beleive that a 97 hire at LUAL currently can NOT hold the Left seat.)
Motch.
PS> Seriously, all this hatred of JP and most things Continental can not be good for your health.
Then again, as you're going to be senior to me.. have at it!
LOL Just Kidding~ Stay healthy and Thirsty.
06-13-2013, 09:20 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
I'm willing to bet anyone that in the next ten or so years, we see it move to 67. Not that I like it or think it's right.. but I think it will happen.
Only question will be, what sort of restrictions and what type of medical?
Can someone fly as a Professional pilot at age 65-67? Sure. But not everyone, and not at a typical schedule.
Just my opinion and I hope I'm wrong on this one.. but the trend may be there.
Motch
Only question will be, what sort of restrictions and what type of medical?
Can someone fly as a Professional pilot at age 65-67? Sure. But not everyone, and not at a typical schedule.
Just my opinion and I hope I'm wrong on this one.. but the trend may be there.
Motch
As I'm sure you know, the problem is not the retirement age. The pool of military pilots is shrinking. It is cost prohibitive for many if not most to rise through the civilian ranks. This career is no longer desirable when you consider the cost vs benefit.
They will change the age to 67. When the retirements resume at 67 a new pilot shortage crisis will be proclaimed. I'm confident studies will be presented showing there is no need for a retirement age as long as one can maintain a medical. Another possible outcome would be the creation of a 200 hr cruise brother for the right seat. A professional button pusher if you will to keep the Capt awake when he drools and autoland when he croaks.
Problem solved right?
Take care
06-13-2013, 09:32 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
As gettinbumped said, 97 was a hiring boom at UAL. The first half of the 97's were bidding capt by late 1999. They could again hold it in the middle of the last decade if memory serves me correct. In all honesty, they were junior and never made any large advancements up the lists in their seat.
I guess the question of the day is, is it more important in the mind of the arbitrators what the junior guy can hold, or what your stovepiped seniority can hold. The first is very subjective involving many variables, the second is not.
Take care.
06-13-2013, 09:49 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Position: Somewhere in a hollowed out hole...yet with broadband
Posts: 115
On my phone so I can't break this out....
You don't think that LCAL has been leaving out "facts" to make their position look better? Puh-LEASE. I've read every word of the transcripts and lets just say I don't see it the way you are presenting.
I've been in this business long enough to not need a lesson from you about "life circumstances". I don't want, need, or expect a windfall. I want a fair solution. And the LCAL proposal is MUCH further from a fair, ALPA merger policy based, solution than the LUAL proposal.
In no way, shape, or form do I fail to recognize what LCAL brought it the merger, so don't make assumptions about what I believe. Personally, I have no interest in the 737, EWR, IAH, CLE, or GUM, but its not about me. It's about the network. And the Latin America operation, Atlantic presence, and New York fortress are VERY valuable. I will also say that almost every CAL pilot I've met has been very pleasant, and I'm looking forward to flying with them. I think the snarky comments by many LUAL pilots on this forum are out of line and short sighted. Frankly, it's why I almost never post on here anymore. There are plenty of LCAL pilots who also fit in this posting category unfortunately.
If LUAL wanted a windfall, and recognized zero value of what LCAL brings to the merger as you suggest, we would have asked for a staple job. The only staple job I've seen is on the LCAL proposed list where they staple every 1997 and junior pilot whether they were ever furloughed or not. Much like his DAL proposal (which was adopted by the arbitration board), the LUAL lawyer put forth the list he thinks should actually be adopted. It's 2 different strategies. Katz went for the weeds and hopes to meet in the middle. Freund puts out what he thinks/hopes he can actually get because in his estimation the arbitrators don't have the time/desire to build their own list. They will probably adopt one and make minor adjustments. Time will tell. But in the last two major mergers, Freund's proposal was adopted. Will it this time? Beats me.
You don't think that LCAL has been leaving out "facts" to make their position look better? Puh-LEASE. I've read every word of the transcripts and lets just say I don't see it the way you are presenting.
I've been in this business long enough to not need a lesson from you about "life circumstances". I don't want, need, or expect a windfall. I want a fair solution. And the LCAL proposal is MUCH further from a fair, ALPA merger policy based, solution than the LUAL proposal.
In no way, shape, or form do I fail to recognize what LCAL brought it the merger, so don't make assumptions about what I believe. Personally, I have no interest in the 737, EWR, IAH, CLE, or GUM, but its not about me. It's about the network. And the Latin America operation, Atlantic presence, and New York fortress are VERY valuable. I will also say that almost every CAL pilot I've met has been very pleasant, and I'm looking forward to flying with them. I think the snarky comments by many LUAL pilots on this forum are out of line and short sighted. Frankly, it's why I almost never post on here anymore. There are plenty of LCAL pilots who also fit in this posting category unfortunately.
If LUAL wanted a windfall, and recognized zero value of what LCAL brings to the merger as you suggest, we would have asked for a staple job. The only staple job I've seen is on the LCAL proposed list where they staple every 1997 and junior pilot whether they were ever furloughed or not. Much like his DAL proposal (which was adopted by the arbitration board), the LUAL lawyer put forth the list he thinks should actually be adopted. It's 2 different strategies. Katz went for the weeds and hopes to meet in the middle. Freund puts out what he thinks/hopes he can actually get because in his estimation the arbitrators don't have the time/desire to build their own list. They will probably adopt one and make minor adjustments. Time will tell. But in the last two major mergers, Freund's proposal was adopted. Will it this time? Beats me.
06-13-2013, 11:00 AM
#60
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Fair enough, I respect your position and I'm NOT trying to give anyone "life lessons". Just making a point, its not personal. I should have said "some" and not you in particular, considering I have no idea how you think, but can only go by what's posted on this board, which frankly at times can be ridiculous and insulting. We've all been in the business long enough to know the ups and downs of the industry. You and I both know we are going to think "fair" is two different equations. I agree about the snarky comments made by both sides, and I have fell into that trap as well, mostly brought on by the ramblings of of a couple of your more stellar douche bags. The ISL will be what it will be. I hope we all can continue careers that will be prosperous and rewarding. (even the douche bags)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
