UAL Pool-ies

Reply Subscribe

Page 17 of 282

« First

117

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

08-22-2013, 07:34 AM

#161

cadetdrivr

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Posts: 2,639

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyflyin

"In the event that the decision and award of the SLI arbitration is in conflict with this agreement, the decision and award will prevail."

Please do try and read the full document before you post.

Whatever.

You actually think the arbs will do something contrary to what the three parties (UAL ALPA, CAL ALPA, and UCH) have already agreed?

Want to buy a bridge?

08-22-2013, 07:34 AM

#162

jsled

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2006

Position: 737 CA

Posts: 2,750

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyflyin

Yes, but if you read down four more paragraphs it says:

"In the event that the decision and award of the SLI arbitration is in conflict with this agreement, the decision and award will prevail."

Please do try and read the full document before you post. That being said, it would not surprise me if they use this even though they are not supposed to be shown this MOU.

Skyflyin...the Arbs don't have to be shown the MOU. The TPA already established the bid awards/cancellations. This MOU just clarifies. As I stated above, it is the opinion of my reps that the Arbs will not weigh in on this as the TPA was agreed to by all parties. We will see.

Sled

08-22-2013, 08:08 AM

#163

Skyflyin

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Posts: 178

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr

Whatever.

You actually think the arbs will do something contrary to what the three parties (UAL ALPA, CAL ALPA, and UCH) have already agreed?

Want to buy a bridge?

Sigh...Please do try and read my full post before you post.

08-22-2013, 08:56 AM

#164

SEDPA

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Posts: 281

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsled

I think the CAL MC proposal included the provision that all bids awarded be trained, which is different than the MOU and T&PA ... so yes, the arbs will have the final say.

08-22-2013, 09:29 AM

#165

Snarge

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2009

Posts: 1,007

......................

08-22-2013, 10:53 AM

#166

jsled

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2006

Position: 737 CA

Posts: 2,750

Quote:

Originally Posted by SEDPA

I think the CAL MC proposal included the provision that all bids awarded be trained, which is different than the MOU and T&PA ... so yes, the arbs will have the final say.

Yes, the CAL NC proposal did include that....in violation of the TPA which the CAL MEC agreed to. BIG SURPRISE there (ie. typical lack of integrity). The Arbs don't have to even mention the awards/cancellations. Let's just wait and see, shall we Skippy. BTW, the CAL NC proposal also stapled me below your furloughed posterior. I'll bet you that doesn't happen either.

Sled

Last edited by jsled; 08-22-2013 at 11:15 AM.

08-22-2013, 10:57 AM

#167

LAX Pilot

Peace Love Understanding

Joined APC: Nov 2012

Position: Airbus

Posts: 1,040

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsled

Typically when the parties stipulate to something outside the arbitration, it is granted as stipulated. I don't think the arbitrators are going to even mention this except allowing what the company and unions have already agreed to.

08-22-2013, 11:00 AM

#168

jsled

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2006

Position: 737 CA

Posts: 2,750

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAX Pilot

Thanks LAX. That was my point.

Sled

08-22-2013, 03:03 PM

#169

SEDPA

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Posts: 281

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsled

Dude, you are going to have an early retirement with all that anger ... I was just pointing out that it is in the realm of possible that all the awards on prior bids may hold ... as far as "violations" by MC's, your side seems to think that prior agreements are also in play ... as far as the final list, who knows, maybe the arbs think more like a 2 to 1 is a better ratio? Whatever they come up with, it will be FAIR AND EQUITABLE, END OF STORY, Sleddy.

08-24-2013, 05:30 AM

#170

gofastmopar

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2012

Position: B756 Capt Junior Lineholder

Posts: 136

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr

I don't have it front of me, but I believe that both pilot groups have already agreed to cancel bids where training has not been scheduled as part of the SFO 737 MOU.

Edit: Found it, it is confirmed in the the MOU:

Upon ISL, all awarded, but not advanced (activated) positions for L-CAL and L-UAL pilots will be cancelled and rebid using Vacancy Bids and the UPA integrated seniority list. Any pilot whose award is cancelled under this provision will exercise displacement rights post SLI (a junior pilot matrix in all categories will be established). The following awards will not be cancelled:

1. Any award of a pilot who is in training, or has been scheduled for training via either an L-CAL Training Advancement Bid or an equivalent L-UAL Vacancy Award Training Plan

2. Any award that is past the effective date of the associated System or Vacancy Bid

3. Any award in which a the pilot is pay protected to that award

4. Any of the initial SFO 737 vacancies to be awarded by virtue of this MOU

Yep... That's me, I'll get to look at the post SLI award and then be able to decide if I want the new position .
My only uncertainty is how many LUAL 756 drivers will bid into the EWR/NYC 756 base, and how senior will they be...
If I don't hold my personal threshold I'll stay on the 737