Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Where are the April bids for FOs? >

Where are the April bids for FOs?

Search

Notices

Where are the April bids for FOs?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-21-2014, 11:08 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
Default

Originally Posted by ERJ Jay
Unless you voted no, you've got no right to complain.

If you voted no, you were smart enough to see this coming a long time ago and should not be surprised.
Unless you were an LCAL guy you were forced to vote yes due to Jay Peirce and his BS!! Thanks JP, how'd that ISL positioning work out for you anyway?
Airhoss is offline  
Old 03-21-2014, 12:40 PM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 419
Default

Originally Posted by ERJ Jay
Unless you voted no, you've got no right to complain.

If you voted no, you were smart enough to see this coming a long time ago and should not be surprised.
What possibly does the failed IT decisions from our current LCAL management have with the JCBA...give it a rest and join the fight.
ChrisJT6 is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 04:58 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
bottoms up's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Position: non reclining seat
Posts: 447
Default

bottoms up is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 06:35 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Default

Originally Posted by Airhoss
Unless you were an LCAL guy you were forced to vote yes due to Jay Peirce and his BS!!
Let me make sure I've got this right. A LUAL pilot who voted yes was forced to by Jay Pierce and CALALPA. A LCAL pilot who voted yes was a coward. A LUAL pilot who voted no was making a heroic stand on principle. A LCAL pilot who voted no was stabbing his LUAL brethren in the back. Does that pretty much sum it up?

Look, Hoss, I really don't care how anyone voted. Hopefully a pilot made an honest assessment of the contract and balanced what they thought was best for them and the pilot group (not always the same, especially as you gain seniority) and clicked the appropriate box. I get a kick out of pilots who, when anything negative in the contract comes up, thump their chests and proclaim "I told you so." Get over it, no contract in history was without its negatives. I also do a face palm when a pilot blames someone else for their yes vote. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Inform yourself and own your vote. In the long run you might be right, you might be wrong (been there myself), but don't blame anyone else.

Which brings us to scope. The reason so many LUAL pilots said they felt pressure to vote yes and relatively few LCAL pilots felt that same pressure was because of UALALPA's inadequate scope protections. There is no more important clause in the contract. Work rules and pay don't matter if you're unemployed. That's not a comment on the voting breakdown, it's essentially a mathematical impossibility the contract didn't have a majority of yes votes on both the LCAL and LUAL sides... it's just reality. Can we finally move on?
XHooker is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 07:13 AM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CousinEddie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,085
Default

Do you really think going forward, whether CAL merged or not, that your 50 seat RJ scope would have survived? At the very least, how many unlimited Q400s would have wound up in the system? The bottom line is that with an uncompetitive feed vs. the rest of the industry, Smisek would have altered that dynamic one way or another. The result would have been larger RJs at CAL just like DAL, UAL, AAL, US, and so on. Contractual provisions never shield any of us from economic reality in the long run.
CousinEddie is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 07:40 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Default

Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Do you really think going forward, whether CAL merged or not, that your 50 seat RJ scope would have survived?
Long story short... no. As you say later, industry pressure would have forced us to trade it for something.

At the very least, how many unlimited Q400s would have wound up in the system?
Not many. There are significant limits on what the plane can do... much more so than on a 70-90 seat jet. The Q is OK EWR-BOS... EWR-ATL not so much.

The bottom line is that with an uncompetitive feed vs. the rest of the industry, Smisek would have altered that dynamic one way or another. The result would have been larger RJs at CAL just like DAL, UAL, AAL, US, and so on.
Agree.

Contractual provisions never shield any of us from economic reality in the long run.
Yes and no. We're obviously subject to economic/industry pressures, but that's not a valid excuse for having something less than the best possible scope provisions within those constraints. Also, regional feed is only one portion of a comprehensive scope section.
XHooker is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 07:59 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Default

Originally Posted by XHooker
Let me make sure I've got this right. A LUAL pilot who voted yes was forced to by Jay Pierce and CALALPA. A LCAL pilot who voted yes was a coward. A LUAL pilot who voted no was making a heroic stand on principle. A LCAL pilot who voted no was stabbing his LUAL brethren in the back. Does that pretty much sum it up?

Look, Hoss, I really don't care how anyone voted. Hopefully a pilot made an honest assessment of the contract and balanced what they thought was best for them and the pilot group (not always the same, especially as you gain seniority) and clicked the appropriate box. I get a kick out of pilots who, when anything negative in the contract comes up, thump their chests and proclaim "I told you so." Get over it, no contract in history was without its negatives. I also do a face palm when a pilot blames someone else for their yes vote. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Inform yourself and own your vote. In the long run you might be right, you might be wrong (been there myself), but don't blame anyone else.

Which brings us to scope. The reason so many LUAL pilots said they felt pressure to vote yes and relatively few LCAL pilots felt that same pressure was because of UALALPA's inadequate scope protections. There is no more important clause in the contract. Work rules and pay don't matter if you're unemployed. That's not a comment on the voting breakdown, it's essentially a mathematical impossibility the contract didn't have a majority of yes votes on both the LCAL and LUAL sides... it's just reality. Can we finally move on?
The explosion of Captain upgrades by LCAL pilots in ORD, DEN, and LAX....facilitated exclusively by the merger....GUARANTEED that the contract would pass. Especially in light of the fact that it was CAL management running the show. We all remember Eastern. But whatever, it's done. The SLI is done. You're right...time to move on.

Sled
jsled is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 08:10 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ERJ Jay's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 362
Default

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
Have you had the opportunity to fly with any ual captains and voice your concern of their yes votes?
Yes.

Everyone could NOT believe that:
1) Global reserves could get any non-HDO day off rolled for a Global trip.
2) That we want from 8 immovable days ( having to be bid in two groups 6-2, 3-5, 4-4) to 6, and that had to be in block ( lost two immovable days off a month).
3) Didn't understand that Overall Solution Constraints in PBS would award pilots junior to them the trips they wanted.
4) Didn't understand that the new three cycle vacation system would be detrimental to people with many vacation days available to bid.
5) Thought that pay rates not keeping up with basic inflation since 2005 was working the same for less "real" money.
6) Were "shocked" at the flexibility that even junior pilots had with bad day worst day trading flexibility to get the days off that they wanted, and worked when they wanted to work, when PBS dealt them a losing hand.

The list goes on and on.

All have been very nice guys, but when I list just some of the above, they're usual response is,

"Wow, I didn't know that was in there".
ERJ Jay is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 09:13 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
APC225's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Default

Originally Posted by ERJ Jay
Yes.

Everyone could NOT believe that:
1) Global reserves could get any non-HDO day off rolled for a Global trip.
2) That we want from 8 immovable days ( having to be bid in two groups 6-2, 3-5, 4-4) to 6, and that had to be in block ( lost two immovable days off a month).
3) Didn't understand that Overall Solution Constraints in PBS would award pilots junior to them the trips they wanted.
4) Didn't understand that the new three cycle vacation system would be detrimental to people with many vacation days available to bid.
5) Thought that pay rates not keeping up with basic inflation since 2005 was working the same for less "real" money.
6) Were "shocked" at the flexibility that even junior pilots had with bad day worst day trading flexibility to get the days off that they wanted, and worked when they wanted to work, when PBS dealt them a losing hand.

The list goes on and on.

All have been very nice guys, but when I list just some of the above, they're usual response is,

"Wow, I didn't know that was in there".
And many more.
- 12:45 between reserve trips, except when they assign a new one before you block in.
- Can't be assigned into an HDO but can be REassigned into one.
- FC DH to cover flying from another base except it must be the whole trip, or start of trip, or any part of trip, depending on who answers phone.
- FSB was an endangered species but it's been saved.
- FIFO, except by silo and there are so many silos you're the only one in it.
- Can only add onto an assignment once but that once takes you to six days.
- 200% SRM would make them staff the airline properly--now with $40k per month pilots.

Last edited by APC225; 03-22-2014 at 09:23 AM.
APC225 is offline  
Old 03-22-2014, 09:46 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
Default

Originally Posted by jsled
The explosion of Captain upgrades by LCAL pilots in ORD, DEN, and LAX....facilitated exclusively by the merger....GUARANTEED that the contract would pass. Especially in light of the fact that it was CAL management running the show. We all remember Eastern. But whatever, it's done. The SLI is done. You're right...time to move on.

Sled
Thanks sled you answered exactly as I would have. That is the basic simple truth and it is the reason that this contract passed.
Airhoss is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
UAL T38 Phlyer
United
10
01-02-2014 03:49 PM
LeeMat
United
214
02-06-2013 08:04 PM
cgull
Major
1
12-16-2012 12:01 AM
FlySlow
Major
43
04-23-2012 05:51 PM
tausap
Major
12
04-09-2011 01:40 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices