The MEC Chairs have it
09-03-2013, 08:37 PM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,871
To be perfectly honest with you I landed about right where I expected to be. Most lists are based upon the merger announcement date or date of closing of the merger. Based upon that I was 66% on the CAL list and I am 66% on the total new list when you consider the folks hired since. I am right next to a guy hired 31/2 yrs before me on the 767 out of ORD. I am 777 in EWR. Not going to complain
09-03-2013, 08:40 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2012
Posts: 104
to clarify,
so you are saying the SLI release does not create any bumps/displacements as of now -
and the next system bid will allow to bid what you can hold based on the new ISL, which may lead to bumps or displacements.
so essentially its just saying this ISL release does not act like a system bid? (i understand its nothing like a system bid, just trying to compare & understand)
09-03-2013, 08:45 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 561
thanks!
to clarify,
so you are saying the SLI release does not create any bumps/displacements as of now -
and the next system bid will allow to bid what you can hold based on the new ISL, which may lead to bumps or displacements.
so essentially its just saying this ISL release does not act like a system bid? (i understand its nothing like a system bid, just trying to compare & understand)
to clarify,
so you are saying the SLI release does not create any bumps/displacements as of now -
and the next system bid will allow to bid what you can hold based on the new ISL, which may lead to bumps or displacements.
so essentially its just saying this ISL release does not act like a system bid? (i understand its nothing like a system bid, just trying to compare & understand)
when there is a bid you can bid what your seniority holds if there is a vacancy. Pilots who are diplaced, many from CAL 14-02 bid, can displace somebody junior to them.
09-03-2013, 08:47 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,202
thanks!
to clarify,
so you are saying the SLI release does not create any bumps/displacements as of now -
and the next system bid will allow to bid what you can hold based on the new ISL, which may lead to bumps or displacements.
so essentially its just saying this ISL release does not act like a system bid? (i understand its nothing like a system bid, just trying to compare & understand)
to clarify,
so you are saying the SLI release does not create any bumps/displacements as of now -
and the next system bid will allow to bid what you can hold based on the new ISL, which may lead to bumps or displacements.
so essentially its just saying this ISL release does not act like a system bid? (i understand its nothing like a system bid, just trying to compare & understand)
However if due to bases closing and fleet shifting and parking DISPLACEMENTS are caused then the junior pilots will start to be moved and maybe out of their seat.
However with all of the retirements and hiring I highly doubt well see downgrades. But I got money saying we see a few junior guys bumped out of base involuntarily.
09-03-2013, 08:56 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2012
Posts: 104
Basically you can't say hey I'm senior to the junior CA so give me his spot in his base. From here on out all positions will be awarded per this list to vacancy postings.
However if due to bases closing and fleet shifting and parking DISPLACEMENTS are caused then the junior pilots will start to be moved and maybe out of their seat.
However with all of the retirements and hiring I highly doubt well see downgrades. But I got money saying we see a few junior guys bumped out of base involuntarily.
However if due to bases closing and fleet shifting and parking DISPLACEMENTS are caused then the junior pilots will start to be moved and maybe out of their seat.
However with all of the retirements and hiring I highly doubt well see downgrades. But I got money saying we see a few junior guys bumped out of base involuntarily.
09-03-2013, 10:03 PM
#56
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
(only had two JW DB's... two finger though~)
On the Oct 2010 list, I was at 98%. Reserve 756 FO.
The comparable LUAL Pilot that was at 98% was a reserve A320 guy (Forgot his name.. got it written down some where).
Tonight, I moved to 92.4% on the new list (and was 81.3% on my LCAL List)
I am sandwiched inbetween 2 LUAL Pilots who were Furloughed on Oct '10.
Come next month, my buddy who was also furloughed but had since taken a job with LCAL and is currently junior to me will be VERY senior to me.
I will be lucky to still be able to hold a line. He was Furloughed on Oct '10! He will be getting my schedule in Oct, I will be getting worse than his~
The LUAL pilot who was 98% and bottom reserve A320 FO in Oct '10 will now be able to hold 777 FO.
If that is considered "Fair and Equitable", so be it.
It's not personal. It's business. I get that.
I won't be ****ed at any of those guys. They didn't do anything.
I'm ****ed at the three Arbitrators.
Hopefully, their time as Arbitrators is done. This should be a big wake up for the next airlines who merge and need Arbitrators.
Congrats to the LUAL Folks. Many hit the lottery tonight.
I am aware that many have also suffered greatly this past decade plus. Just a shame that it had to come off the backs of the Legacy Continental Pilot Group.
I was against our (LCAL) Proposal from the start and have posted that on numerous Forums and Threads. What I was also fearful was that we might be punished for our proposal. Seems I was right (after reading the Arbitrators Award Brief).
Oh well...
Still gonna fly my plane Safely and Professionally. It's what I'm paid to do and what my passengers expect. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I was disappointed and whenever I see a 75 heading off to Germany while I'm going to Glasgow, I'll be bummed.
Always
Motch
09-03-2013, 10:07 PM
#57
Peace Love Understanding
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Sorry man. Those guys had to get some credit for their longevity, and the 35% was enough to put them with active pilots. Its the policy, not the arbitrators.
At least there is a bunch of retirements for the next 20 years.....
At least there is a bunch of retirements for the next 20 years.....
09-03-2013, 10:10 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Posts: 169
Please explain how an LUAL 89 hire trumps an 87 hire at CAL? With what ALPA no doubt paid the arbitrators to completely ignore what CAL brought to the table, I think I'm going to be an arbitrator. I can be as crooked as the next guy. ALPA, in my opinion, saw the writing on the wall. Lose the LUAL pilots, lose the combined group and the millions they bring to the coffers. Better to appease the larger group.
09-03-2013, 10:24 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Clear Right
Posts: 276
definitely look forward to reading the details and reasoning behind the award and not just looking at the numbers on list. want to understand the method and reasoning behind the decision. good luck to all going forward.
09-03-2013, 10:26 PM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,874
Please explain how an LUAL 89 hire trumps an 87 hire at CAL? With what ALPA no doubt paid the arbitrators to completely ignore what CAL brought to the table, I think I'm going to be an arbitrator. I can be as crooked as the next guy. ALPA, in my opinion, saw the writing on the wall. Lose the LUAL pilots, lose the combined group and the millions they bring to the coffers. Better to appease the larger group.
It's done - move on.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
