UAL/CAL Seniority Award

HVYMETALDRVR said:
The problem is you guys are riding the exceptions, not the general rule. There are always exceptions, sure. We have a couple guys that were hired here at the age of 19, now 15 years later they're in the top 10 percent and still have 30 years before retirement (I'm at a regional). They make six figures, pick they're schedule, and still aren't too old to bail for a major.

But take the top 25% of the SL from AA, DL, USair, and United, how many are under 42 and/or have been flying for less than 20 years. I'd bank its not many.
Click to expand...

Again. Irrelevant.
 
z987k said:
I think that's one of the douchiest things I've heard on a radio. What an ass.
Click to expand...
I asked for clarification today (a Beagle-painted SkyWest CRJ200 was left to right and a Beagle-painted Beagle CRJ700 was right to left, and I didn't know who to follow, clearance was "give way to Eagle...")...and they got mad at me.
 
Derg said:
This is one of those instances when I'm having a circular debate with wife, I clasp my hands together, lean in and ask, "What can I say to make you happy, hon?" :)
Click to expand...
Well that's your fault. Why would you be having a "circular debate" with @Kristie in the first place? You know that she's always right!
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Have you...been junior recently?
Click to expand...

Yep. But spreading the pain around isn't the answer. The answer is making reserve less painful. We've done that successfully at AirTran, to the point where someone like me actually bids it on purpose even though I could easily hold a good line. Seniority should mean something. And part of what it means is that you shouldn't be tethered to your phone for part of every year well into your senior years if you don't want to be.
 
Polar742 said:
You'll never get to SEA.
Click to expand...

Is there a hit out on me already? Dammit, that's why I was leaving NYC.

(Dispassionate listener who isn't used to my flavor of sarcasm, I'm KIDDING. Please don't ask me doofus questions on Facebook. This is humor)
 
Last edited:
cencal83406 said:
But no, in an ISL, your personal experience doesn't matter. What matters is your pre ISL %, post ISL %, and the things that go into making that as close as possible.

What you are advocating could lead a junior pilot at your pre-merger company to leap frog ahead of you in an ISL.
Click to expand...


I would argue that in an ISL the retirement numbers that one side brings to the table versus what the other side need to be considered. One might be at 50% on the snapshot date, but on his side would have been top 10% fifteen years later. While the other sides guy at 50% might only be at 30% fifteen years later.

The DAL/NWA integration is a good case in point. The mid seniority NWA guys lost a lot because of the huge number of early retirements at DAL. DAL guys went out in the thousands to take their pension money. The result is that on the snapshot date the 50% guy at DAL would probably have remained pretty stagnant for a decade while the NWA guy would have been going up ( percentage wise ) much better. The NWA guys saved their pension so didn't have to bail to get their money. Then they lose out in the integration because of the methodology used. Not fair to them.

This is where the arbitrator got closer to correct on the UAL/CAL integration. The methodology they used protects the older pilot group to an certain extent.

I still advocate DOH with fences as the best overall method for any integration. That way nobody gets a windfall and nobody gets screwed too badly.



Typhoonpilot
 
typhoonpilot said:
I still advocate DOH with fences as the best overall method for any integration. That way nobody gets a windfall and nobody gets screwed too badly.
Click to expand...

DOH almost always gives one party a windfall at the expense of the other. In your case, it would have given the AAA pilots an immense windfall, stapling a huge number of AWA pilots to the bottom of the list, and artificially suppressing the earned seniority of the rest.

Long-term fences as a means to address such inequities have proven to be a nightmare in previous integrations. The Republic/Northwest merger is the classic case of your preferred integration methodology, and it resulted in two decades of bitter in-fighting and over 20 arbitrations. Arbitrators have unanimously rejected such a methodology since then, and even go out of their way in some awards to talk about how bad an idea it is. If you read the UAL/CAL award, in fact, you'll find that the panel writes how horrible such a methodology always ends up being, and they reject it strongly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top