Age 60 rule, according to Len Morgan

[typhoonpilot]

Absolutely wrong. But... well, you'll see one day. Maybe. Like has been stated, it has been observed over and over again that the NW/Republic merger was how not to integrate a pilot group.

The east's pursuit of DOH has torpedoed any chance of them making any money. So, instead of dealing with the arbitration that they signed up for to protect their widebody captain seats... they are now making less than junior narrowbody copilots at other airlines. So... you kept your seat, but are making less than if you sat right seat on it otherwise.

Brilliant.

Thankfully I am not part of that whole mess.

That said, the hundreds of upgrades on the east side over the last few years proves that the windfall would have gone to AWA pilots had the Nic been implemented. The attrition based advancement of the east side was stolen from them with a relative position integration. All those advancements would have gone to AWA pilots, who being much younger would never have gotten out of the seats, leaving the mid to junior east pilots on the bottom half of the list for far longer than one could consider reasonable.



TP

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

All of which was taken into account by the arbitrator. What you ignore is that Airways was a dead airline without the merger, and those upgrades never would have occurred. Everyone would have been jobless, instead. While some credit has to be given due to the older age of the AAA pilots, a deduction also has to be made for the fact that it was essentially a dead airline, while AWA was far more likely to survive the post-9/11 environment, and in fact, saved Airways.

 

[HRDiva]

All of which was taken into account by the arbitrator. What you ignore is that Airways was a dead airline without the merger, and those upgrades never would have occurred. Everyone would have been jobless, instead. While some credit has to be given due to the older age of the AAA pilots, a deduction also has to be made for the fact that it was essentially a dead airline, while AWA was far more likely to survive the post-9/11 environment, and in fact, saved Airways.

Didn't the outside investors save both sorry airlines? It wasn't AWA buying U, it was outside investors merging the two.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Not really. Doug Parker, CEO of America West, put together a package deal that involved quite a few investors and contractors fronting money, but a lot of the deal really revolved around the value of the merger itself, as shares in the new company were given to creditors in exchange for debt that Airways owed. It was a complex transaction, but in the end, Airways was technically purchased by AWA, with Parker putting together the deal. Without Parker, Airways was done.

 

[typhoonpilot]

....and without the combination one might argue that AWA would have gone out of business ( or been bought by someone else ) by 2009 at the latest.

The fact of the matter is that USAirways did not go out of business. Nor did TWA for that matter. Read my earlier post on the matter. Economic reasons should not be used to integrate seniority lists. These things are beyond the control of the pilots. We need to treat each other with respect.

The SWA pilots did not treat the Air Tran pilots with respect. They take the attitude that they are paid far more, therefore they are somehow superior to an Air Tran pilot. Therefore they staple you and think you should be grateful to have a job that pays more than you used to be paid. Not fair was it? Delayed your upgrade by about 9 years?

Todd. Think about this. You say the NWA/Republic merger was the worst that it could be. So they had some clarifications needed via arbitration. In the end nobody's career was destroyed. Nobody's life was destroyed. They stayed in ALPA.

Now take the USAir/AWA relative position merger. It was so bad to so many pilots that they felt the only way to avoid it was to leave ALPA. End result is that 5000+ pilots left ALPA, not all of their own accord. I'd say that is a worse result.

Also look at SWA/Air Tran. Relative position = not fair to the SWA pilots. Date-of-hire more fair. With conditions and restrictions, namely minimum captain positions in Atlanta, very fair. With reduction in size of Atlanta base the ability for Air Tran pilots to bid ( with that date-of-hire ) into SWA bases = really fair.

Get it?


TP

 

[mshunter]

Air Line Pilots Association president Charley Ruby protested, but received little membership support. The majority of younger members favored the rule; now they would move up to seniority faster. It was an unthinking, self-serving stance unworthy of them, but the egoistic "get mine while I can" syndrome was irresistable.

Funny, how even 60 years ago, this was still an issue.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

....and without the combination one might argue that AWA would have gone out of business ( or been bought by someone else ) by 2009 at the latest.

Sure, one could "argue" just about anything. But there's really no evidence to support it. USAirways' dire straights are a matter of record. They were down to days of remaining cash, and no one was willing to help them out until Parker came along.

Economic reasons should not be used to integrate seniority lists. These things are beyond the control of the pilots.

Economic reasons speak to career expectations. The USAirways pilots had no career expectations.

The SWA pilots did not treat the Air Tran pilots with respect. They take the attitude that they are paid far more, therefore they are somehow superior to an Air Tran pilot. Therefore they staple you and think you should be grateful to have a job that pays more than you used to be paid. Not fair was it? Delayed your upgrade by about 9 years?

I wish it was just nine years. It'll probably end up being more like 15, but 10 would be the bare minimum even if we grow at a decent clip.

Todd. Think about this. You say the NWA/Republic merger was the worst that it could be. So they had some clarifications needed via arbitration. In the end nobody's career was destroyed. Nobody's life was destroyed. They stayed in ALPA.

Of course they stayed in ALPA. The minority was the group that got screwed. How exactly do you think a minority is going to lead a secession?

Now take the USAir/AWA relative position merger. It was so bad to so many pilots that they felt the only way to avoid it was to leave ALPA. End result is that 5000+ pilots left ALPA, not all of their own accord. I'd say that is a worse result.

It was a fair integration. I don't believe that a group deciding to take their ball and go home just because they weren't able to screw over another group is a sign that we need to allow them to screw people over in the future just to keep them in the union. I'd rather have people like that leave instead of catering to their unethical desires.

Also look at SWA/Air Tran. Relative position = not fair to the SWA pilots. Date-of-hire more fair. With conditions and restrictions, namely minimum captain positions in Atlanta, very fair. With reduction in size of Atlanta base the ability for Air Tran pilots to bid ( with that date-of-hire ) into SWA bases = really fair.

DOH would have been just as unfair as what was done to us. The difference is negligible. Only a status/category ratio'd integration would have been a fair integration.

 

[typhoonpilot]

Read this part one more time:

Economic reasons should not be used to integrate seniority lists. These things are beyond the control of the pilots. We need to treat each other with respect.

You speak of ethics then you advocate kicking a guy while he is down.

Until ALPA leadership and the entire professional pilot workforce can get away from the attitude that you are displaying here our career is a crapshot at best.

DOH would have been just as unfair as what was done to us. The difference is negligible. Only a status/category ratio'd integration would have been a fair integration.

Date-of-hire with conditions and restrictions that protected your flying in ATL would have kept your captains in their seats and when they retired would have allowed your first officers to move into those seats before a SWA pilot. Clearly I don't have any of the information to make that specific, but that could have been the gist of it.

My point will continually be that if there was one set industry standard that all parties use it will end up being fairer to all professional pilots over the long run

Now can we talk about National Seniority Numbers?

If ALPA would start it now at the beginning of the coming hiring wave then 30 years down the road all these discussions could be moot. They missed the boat with it in the late 80s when there was a movement for it. Imagine had it happened then we could be so much more close to a more stable career field.


Typhoonpilot

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

....and without the combination one might argue that AWA would have gone out of business ( or been bought by someone else ) by 2009 at the latest.

The fact of the matter is that USAirways did not go out of business. Nor did TWA for that matter. Read my earlier post on the matter. Economic reasons should not be used to integrate seniority lists. These things are beyond the control of the pilots. We need to treat each other with respect.

The SWA pilots did not treat the Air Tran pilots with respect. They take the attitude that they are paid far more, therefore they are somehow superior to an Air Tran pilot. Therefore they staple you and think you should be grateful to have a job that pays more than you used to be paid. Not fair was it? Delayed your upgrade by about 9 years?

Todd. Think about this. You say the NWA/Republic merger was the worst that it could be. So they had some clarifications needed via arbitration. In the end nobody's career was destroyed. Nobody's life was destroyed. They stayed in ALPA.

Now take the USAir/AWA relative position merger. It was so bad to so many pilots that they felt the only way to avoid it was to leave ALPA. End result is that 5000+ pilots left ALPA, not all of their own accord. I'd say that is a worse result.

Also look at SWA/Air Tran. Relative position = not fair to the SWA pilots. Date-of-hire more fair. With conditions and restrictions, namely minimum captain positions in Atlanta, very fair. With reduction in size of Atlanta base the ability for Air Tran pilots to bid ( with that date-of-hire ) into SWA bases = really fair.

Get it?


TP

No careers destroyed by the roberts award? Hello Mr. out of touch with reality.

Both US and AWA were toast without the merger. Nicolau should have had higher fences, but it ends there. It was a fair award. The most junior US pilot at the time of the award via DOH would have been an AWA captain. Hardly fair. US had sucked long and hard since the 80s... no way around that. Perhaps longevity of service would have been more "fair," but DOH is stupid in the case of that integration.

In a later post you are now talking about national seniority numbers. Apparently we have someone who lives in a utopian pipe dream and not reality.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Read this part one more time:

Economic reasons should not be used to integrate seniority lists. These things are beyond the control of the pilots. We need to treat each other with respect.

I read it the first time, and reading it a second time doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Economic reasons speak to career expectations, which is what matters more than anything in a seniority integration.

You speak of ethics then you advocate kicking a guy while he is down.

I've advocated no such thing. That's what the Age 65 crowd did with screwing over the guy who had his upgrade slot delayed five years, and worse, furloughing thousands of pilots.

Date-of-hire with conditions and restrictions that protected your flying in ATL would have kept your captains in their seats and when they retired would have allowed your first officers to move into those seats before a SWA pilot. Clearly I don't have any of the information to make that specific, but that could have been the gist of it.

DOH would have done virtually nothing for us. Our upgrade times were 5-6 years, and placing us in DOH order would have extended those upgrade times to 12-18 years. In other words, essentially the same as the deal we got. We're dealing with an airline that has incredibly low retirements numbers until the mid to late 2020s. Not to mention that C&Rs do nothing to prevent furloughs, which are a real possibility here. With a DOH integration, the bottom of the list would have been stacked with AirTran pilots, just like you wanted to do to the AWA pilots. Patently unfair when we were growing, and they were stagnant.

Frankly, you just don't know what you're talking about.

My point will continually be that if there was one set industry standard that all parties use it will end up being fairer to all professional pilots over the long run

Honoring binding arbitration is the gold standard that all parties use. Well, except for USAPA and SWAPA, of course.

Now can we talk about National Seniority Numbers?

I'd love to. Maybe you could start by asking your fellow AAA pilots why they fought so hard against it when times were good for them, and then supported it when times were bad for them. Ask the same question of every other pilot group. Maybe then you'll understand why this fantasy will never happen. Pilots are their own worst enemies.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

ATN- the only two large carriers that have lower attrition than WN are FL and B6... it was mostly a merger of equals... some sort of ratio would have made sense. However, someone hired today at either carrier would enjoy a retirement based upgrade of around 2030 regardless.

 

[BajtheJino]

The majority of younger members favored the rule; now they would move up to seniority faster. It was an unthinking, self-serving stance unworthy of them, but the egoistic "get mine while I can" syndrome was irresistible.

Nothing has changed from the time in history this article is talking about and today.
Thats all I've got. Mmbye-bye.

 

[typhoonpilot]

Economic reasons speak to career expectations, which is what matters more than anything in a seniority integration.

Using that rational you support the SWA arguments for stapling the Air Tran F.O.s and taking the left seat away the Air Tran captains. They would say your expectations were not to make the money that they make to justify their integration method.

I've advocated no such thing. That's what the Age 65 crowd did with screwing over the guy who had his upgrade slot delayed five years, and worse, furloughing thousands of pilots.

Sure you did. You said the east pilots had no career epxectation since the airline was within days of shutting down. That means the pilots are down on their luck. Since they were "saved" by AWA they must now be punished for their management's incompetence so the junior pilots must lose all of their attrition based advancement. That is most certainly kicking somebody when they are down.

DOH would have done virtually nothing for us. Our upgrade times were 5-6 years, and placing us in DOH order would have extended those upgrade times to 12-18 years. In other words, essentially the same as the deal we got. We're dealing with an airline that has incredibly low retirements numbers until the mid to late 2020s. Not to mention that C&Rs do nothing to prevent furloughs, which are a real possibility here. With a DOH integration, the bottom of the list would have been stacked with AirTran pilots, just like you wanted to do to the AWA pilots. Patently unfair when we were growing, and they were stagnant.

Frankly, you just don't know what you're talking about.

Ahh, I do know what I am talking about. Upgrade times are elusive to predict. We can say upgrade times for somebody hired 5-6 years ago are 5-6 years. But what about somebody hired today? Does the growth rate continue such that the upgrade time remains the same? Would Air Tran's growth rate have continued for another 5-6 years unchanged?

I highly doubt it. No airline's does. Maybe it could have gone for another year or two, three at the outside.

SWA is a great example. Historically their upgrade times were in the 5 year range. That was when they were growing quite rapidly. Now that they have attained a rather large size and the market is quite saturated with the business model that growth rate can not be maintained. Thus their upgrade times have risen significantly. I'm not even sure what they are but I would imagine their junior guys are looking at in excess of 10-15 years, much like the junior guys at Air Tran would have been looking at.

You advocate a relative position integration with SWA. The senior Air Tran pilot was hired in the early 90s. The senior active SWA pilots were hired in the mid-late 70s. How is it fair to place them side by side on a system wide basis? Too, it would not be fair for the senior SWA guys to bid into ATL displacing Air Tran guys. Thus date-of-hire with conditions and restrictions. And yes, those could include clauses to protect downsizing of the ATL base.

Honoring binding arbitration is the gold standard that all parties use. Well, except for USAPA and SWAPA, of course.

Ahh, but even you mentioned all the subsequent arbitrations in the NWA/Republic case. Nobody accepts the first judgement without further debate. Unfortunately in the AAA/AWA case the first judgement was so destructive to more than half of the AAA pilots that further interpretive arbitrations would not have solved the problem.

I'd love to. Maybe you could start by asking your fellow AAA pilots why they fought so hard against it when times were good for them, and then supported it when times were bad for them. Ask the same question of every other pilot group. Maybe then you'll understand why this fantasy will never happen. Pilots are their own worst enemies

Agreed here, pilots are their own worst enemies at times. Again, long term thinking, that's what is missing.



Typhoonpilot

 

[Hacker15e]

For you guys who are smarter and have much stronger opinions on this than I (not because I don't care, but because I'm an ignorant military dude with no 121 experience):

Does it matter if it is a "merger" or an "acquisition" with respect to how the SLI should go, or is that just two ways to describe the same thing from a SLI perspective?

 

[typhoonpilot]

No careers destroyed by the roberts award? Hello Mr. out of touch with reality.

Okay, give me specifics?


TP

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

ATN- the only two large carriers that have lower attrition than WN are FL and B6... it was mostly a merger of equals... some sort of ratio would have made sense. However, someone hired today at either carrier would enjoy a retirement based upgrade of around 2030 regardless.

I was speaking about actual upgrade times, not theoretical retirement-based upgrades. But you're right from the perspective of how an arbitrator would look at things, because they don't take growth into account, typically. That's why I always say that a ratio'd list by category and status would have been fair, even though it still increased our upgrade times substantially.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Using that rational you support the SWA arguments for stapling the Air Tran F.O.s and taking the left seat away the Air Tran captains. They would say your expectations were not to make the money that they make to justify their integration method.

We're not talking CBAs here, we're talking company financials. Pilot CBAs change every few years. That's why arbitrators don't care about them when doing seniority integrations. But the economic conditions of the carriers at the time of the merger is definitely considered, and very relevant, because it speaks to the career expectations of the pilots in a real way in real time. In our case, AirTran was a growing, profitable carrier. SWA was a stagnant carrier with little hope of growth, and likely contraction.

Sure you did. You said the east pilots had no career epxectation since the airline was within days of shutting down. That means the pilots are down on their luck. Since they were "saved" by AWA they must now be punished for their management's incompetence so the junior pilots must lose all of their attrition based advancement. That is most certainly kicking somebody when they are down.

It's not about "punishment," it's about recognizing reality. A pilot at a dead carrier has no career expectations, and therefore can't expect to bump a pilot down the list who comes from a carrier that is financially healthy.

Ahh, I do know what I am talking about. Upgrade times are elusive to predict. We can say upgrade times for somebody hired 5-6 years ago are 5-6 years. But what about somebody hired today? Does the growth rate continue such that the upgrade time remains the same? Would Air Tran's growth rate have continued for another 5-6 years unchanged?

I highly doubt it. No airline's does. Maybe it could have gone for another year or two, three at the outside.

SWA is a great example. Historically their upgrade times were in the 5 year range. That was when they were growing quite rapidly. Now that they have attained a rather large size and the market is quite saturated with the business model that growth rate can not be maintained. Thus their upgrade times have risen significantly. I'm not even sure what they are but I would imagine their junior guys are looking at in excess of 10-15 years, much like the junior guys at Air Tran would have been looking at.

All of which is true. But none of which points to DOH being a fair integration methodology. It actually points to a ratio'd integration, as I've been saying.

You advocate a relative position integration with SWA. The senior Air Tran pilot was hired in the early 90s. The senior active SWA pilots were hired in the mid-late 70s. How is it fair to place them side by side on a system wide basis?

Because date of hire has absolutely nothing to do with bidding power at an airline. Relative seniority within a category and status does.

Ahh, but even you mentioned all the subsequent arbitrations in the NWA/Republic case. Nobody accepts the first judgement without further debate. Unfortunately in the AAA/AWA case the first judgement was so destructive to more than half of the AAA pilots that further interpretive arbitrations would not have solved the problem.

Arbitrating after an integration is about resolving disputes related to the interpretation of the agreement. It has nothing to do with overturning an agreement. And just like with the initial seniority integration arbitration, subsequent arbitrations follow the same rule: final and binding is the gold standard.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

For you guys who are smarter and have much stronger opinions on this than I (not because I don't care, but because I'm an ignorant military dude with no 121 experience):

Does it matter if it is a "merger" or an "acquisition" with respect to how the SLI should go, or is that just two ways to describe the same thing from a SLI perspective?

Every merger is actually an acquisition. It has to be structured that way for many reasons, both legal and economic. But as far as seniority integrations go, arbitrators don't care who acquired who.

 

[dustoff17]

First of all, this merger (if it happens) doesn't affect me unless you want to tangent this thread into the cost of airline tickets. Secondly, I'm not a 121 pilot or ALPA member (whew!). And finally, I'm with Hacker in that I don't have a dog in this fight.

Mine is just an observation.....

SITUATION: Company A (or let's call it AA just for the fun of it) has filed for bankruptcy. Company B has made an offer to acquire/merge with Company AA.
The employees of B don't want the acquired employees to integrate into their lineup because it screws up their hard work, their seniority list and hinders the progress of their employees. AND it's not their company that is bankrupt so why should they make concessions? The employees of AA want to integrate because they don't want to lose their hard earned, yet no longer viable seniority list. B wants their world protected (and rightfully so). AA employees want to retain their position without the full understanding that it's their company under bankruptcy.

QUESTIONS: Why should the employees/union members of B allow the addition/integration to their lineup? For that matter what do the employees of B owe the employees of AA? What grounds do AA employees have to stand on in order to "force" the integration? Why should B employees treat AA employees with the same respect they treat their "own" IF the integration is forced upon them?

I've been reading this thread with interest and have noticed one thing that seems to be present in every union discussion that I've been witness to. Based on my personal experience with unions and many threads/articles such as this one, it seems that EVERY union person is out for themselves rather than the benefit of the collective group as a whole. If you're currently on the AA side, you WANT full integration; if you're on the B side, you want all the AA people to go to the bottom of the list. There is no way the ALPA can be equitable to both sides because they jacked it up to begin with by their lack of standards in initial contract negotiations.
In this situation, the Union is clearly divided so it makes the word "union" rather moot, doesn't it?

Let's get away from pilots and any ALPA/union involvement here just for a minute. In ANY other industry the employees of a company under bankruptcy, being "merged" with another company, would be thrilled just to keep their jobs! Under merging (absorption) procedures there would be no expectation to keep their jobs let alone be integrated WITH seniority into the lineup of other employees. In the "real" world there are thousands of people that are starting over, not by choice but because it's what happens when companies fail. That's life.........

 

[typhoonpilot]

I've been reading this thread with interest and have noticed one thing that seems to be present in every union discussion that I've been witness to. Based on my personal experience with unions and many threads/articles such as this one, it seems that EVERY union person is out for themselves rather than the benefit of the collective group as a whole. If you're currently on the AA side, you WANT full integration; if you're on the B side, you want all the AA people to go to the bottom of the list. There is no way the ALPA can be equitable to both sides because they jacked it up to begin with by their lack of standards in initial contract negotiations.

Bingo, you understand.

That is one of the main points I am trying to drive at. All carriers need to sign on to a single standard so that pilots have some support when mergers/buyouts happen.

In this situation, the Union is clearly divided so it makes the word "union" rather moot, doesn't it?

Let's get away from pilots and any ALPA/union involvement here just for a minute. In ANY other industry the employees of a company under bankruptcy, being "merged" with another company, would be thrilled just to keep their jobs! Under merging (absorption) procedures there would be no expectation to keep their jobs let alone be integrated WITH seniority into the lineup of other employees. In the "real" world there are thousands of people that are starting over, not by choice but because it's what happens when companies fail. That's life.....

This I am going to have to disagree with to a point. In many cases the highly experienced company employee will be integrated into the combined company at a level commensurate with that experience. If they do get laid off then they might be able to take the experience to another company and start at a mid to executive level position. The same is not true for airline pilots unless they go overseas where direct entry captain positions are available.

TP