US Airways pilots' seniority disputes may muddle merger

Well, date of hire works great for a merger of two very similar carriers, but that's a rarity if not an impossibility.

For a period of time, some of the most senior America West pilots were "junior" to some of the least senior, furloughed pilots at USAirways. Date of hire would have meant that, technically speaking, the senior captain at America West could displace to first officer or even get furloughed and the US Airways pilot who has been on furlough comes back to work.

Of course, "technically speaking".

But then you can staple, like American did with TWA, which didn't work out very well and there are lawsuits-a-plenty.

You could acquire like Southwest did Muse Air and American Trans Air and just gut the operation.

You can have "no bump no flush" language, or language similar to what Northwest had when it merged with Republic but I won't EEEEEEEEVEN try to exhume that corpse and try to describe it.

Ours at Southernjets, in a very VERY simple explanation, was what you could hold before the merger would be would you would be able to old AFTER the merger. So if you were a bottom of the barrel reserve on the DC-9, after the merger, you would still be a bottom of the barrel reserve on the DC-9 and categorized with similar bottom of the barrel reserves on similar equipment at the other carrier.

Some people expected date of hire.

Some expected to keep their "number", which was hilarious because one gentlemen I had the "pleasure" of having my quiet lunch interrupted when the list came out was 5,000 of 5,100 (or something like that, these are NOT exact numbers obviously) and "numerically expected" to be 5,000 of 11,000 and moving from reserve FO on the 757 to, widebody international captain.

Seniority list integration is a messy business, especially when you mix arrogance ("We have super premium flying and we don't consider your widebodies true widebodies"), greed ("break out the Swingline stapler and staple them!"), groupthink ("We saved YOU guys, you should be happy you aren't furloughed!"/"We were the stronger carrier, but the banking interests ran us through bankruptcy and financed your acquisition of us because it was cheaper than letting YOU go bankrupt and they liked your management more than ours") and pride ("We are a better airline, thus, we should bear the spoils").

We had a smooth SLI. Not too many lawsuits, everyone is largely "Meh.... same as it ever was", yes, there are still people on the DALPA forum exhuming dead horse corpses and beating the tarnations out of it, but then there are also those in our profession that would bitch about "Free Taco Tuesday" because it's being held outside of the SIDA and they have to take their shoes off when going through the checkpoint.

Blarg.

I'll tell you this, that if USAPA expects to waltz into negotiations with the APA without their own house in order holding onto delusions of what they want to do with the Nicolau award, they're going to get their hats handed to them.

'Merrkun don't mess 'round.
 
Why don't they just take seniority percentage and integrate that way, with some language about not getting displaced.

If your "friend" was 5000/5100 or 2% senior then just make him roughly 2% senior at the merged company. I'm sure I'm missing something but that would seem fair.
 
Why don't they just take seniority percentage and integrate that way, with some language about not getting displaced.

If your "friend" was 5000/5100 or 2% senior then just make him roughly 2% senior at the merged company. I'm sure I'm missing something but that would seem fair.

In a very general sense, that's what we did.

Some gained a few percent, some lost a few percent. There are some anomalies but for the most part, that's what we got.
 
Why don't they just take seniority percentage and integrate that way, with some language about not getting displaced.

If your "friend" was 5000/5100 or 2% senior then just make him roughly 2% senior at the merged company. I'm sure I'm missing something but that would seem fair.

That was doug's point. During our SLI no one moved more than 3-4% up or down (NW with the highest % relative up with their 95 hires, and DL with the highest % move down with the 91/92 hires).... most stayed within a % of pre merger relative. I moved up .25%.

He was commenting that the guy just was a blithering idiot when it came to math. His seniority was 5000 before the merger, and he expected to remain that, when in actuality the same relative position would turn out to be around 9500.

I've had similar people complain to me... "i lost 4000 numbers of seniority in the merger!" "explain." Commence a diatribe demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of ratios.

Others complain about losing years of seniority since the date of hires didn't match up.

Of course, if most of the population is complaining about the way the SLI came out, the SLI was probably done pretty much right. :)
 
Uh? It's all about the hire date right? That's how seniority is determined. Or am I missing something? Are there multiple seniority lists at an airline that has never had a merger? Are the lists based on something other than seniority? You're confusing me.

You're confusing longevity with seniority. Longevity is basically length of service, with sometimes some minor corrections based upon leaves of absence and such. So, your longevity is pretty much pegged to your hire date. But seniority is not longevity. Seniority is a position on a list of employees, and with that position comes bidding power. For example, I was at about 78% on the AirTran seniority list when the merger was announced. That seniority put me just in the top half of 717 FOs. My longevity was only 4 years, but that has nothing to do with seniority. Again, seniority is a relative position on a list of employees. If you were to take our list and merge it with, say, Pinnacle's, and you did as you suggest with DOH, then there would be RJ captains bumping 737 captains out of their seats. Obviously, that's not an equitable merger. Why? Because someone got a windfall. The RJ captain goes from flying a 50-seat airplane to flying a 137-seat airplane. He's no longer flying from DTW-XNA and staying at the Holiday Inn Express, he's flying from MKE-CUN and spending 24-hour layovers in the Ritz. Someone's quality of life has changed dramatically, and for no justifiable reason.

That's why pilots don't merge lists by DOH. Unlike plumbers, or air conditioning repairmen, or auto workers, our QOL isn't determined as much by longevity as it is by seniority. And the two are VERY different things.
 
Okay I'm with you so far.



Okay so some Airways guys were hired around the same time as some AWA guys. I'm still with you.



That would be fair. It sucks but its fair.

I mean, why would a pilot hired at Airways in 1995, be allowed to have a higher seniority number than a AWA guy hired in 1988 if the companies merge? That's not fair.

Ok, suppose an airline has been around since the 1920s and today with 6,000 pilots. However, this company has stagnated and not had an active pilot hired since 1990. Assume for agument sake that the guys hired in the 90s are furloughed. Also suppose that this airline has twice been in bankruptcy and nearly liquidated.

Now suppose an airline that started in 1984. They are a smaller size than the above airline, with about 140 airplanes. This airline grew a lot, but the significant growth came in the 90s and 2000s. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of these pilots were hired in the 90s and 2000s. Their most junior Captain was hired in 1999, and the year right now is 2005. That's a 6 year upgrade. Now also suppose that this airline, for all practical purposes, merged with the company above, saving the company above from liquidation!

Now what's fair?

The previous mentioned company nearly died (liquidation) and that would have ended everyone's career. The new airline that merged with them provided the lifeline necessary to keep afloat.

For merger, only 7% of active pilots of the second airline were hired prior to 1990. The majority, ~ 93% were hired after 1990. For the other airline, the majority (8-90% were hired before 1990) and assume that all their guys hired after 1990 were furloughed.

So according to your model of pure DOH, you are stapling the second airline. 93% would be placed under the entire other pilot group, effectively downgrading every single Captain and pushing the curren FOs even further. Is that "fair"?

Now consider original airline almost liquidated twice and WOULD have liquidated had the merger with the newer airline not happened. How does that come into play?

Also consider the 1990 furloughees at older airline. They haven't flown, they were hired, and furloughed. Some of them might not even be flying! You are going to give them DOH credit? For what? Never having flown at that airline?

Sorry, but these are (mostly) facts about the US Airways and AWA merger. A straight up DOH is a windfall, and that is not allowed. In any merger, because seniority varies greatly across different airlines, "career expectations" are suppose to be protected. That's why arbitrators do not use straight up DOH in their arbitration cases.
 
n628558415_349660_1715-1.jpg
Very good post! All good points and well put.
 
Yeah I guess I don't understand why percentage of seniority isn't the norm...everyone benefits from the merger, the smaller company that merges with the larger system that was bankrupt provides more opportunity for the smaller company and the older guys get to keep the job and seniority equivalent to what they had...I think it's folks that want a windfall at the expense of the other group that causes the strife...but like I say that's my outside perspective and one with no true understanding of the issues.
 
Yeah I guess I don't understand why percentage of seniority isn't the norm...everyone benefits from the merger, the smaller company that merges with the larger system that was bankrupt provides more opportunity for the smaller company and the older guys get to keep the job and seniority equivalent to what they had...I think it's folks that want a windfall at the expense of the other group that causes the strife...but like I say that's my outside perspective and one with no true understanding of the issues.

You have to look at the extremes.

Like if (when...) we merge with Alaska, their top #1 pilot is a 737 captain.

Now he's bid eligible to fly in the first few percentage as a 777 captain.

Windfall for the Alaska pilot, wicked-pissah for the guy who was just about to upgrade to the 777 before the merger.

Two similar airlines is relatively easy. When you start combining very dissimilar carriers, people start showing their asses with catlike quickness.
 
It still shouldn't be complicated, though. Ratio by category and status. A senior Alaska 737 captain should end up being merged into the same spot on the list as senior 737 captains at Delta. He's still a captain, still holding the same bidding power for schedules and vacations, and he doesn't get a windfall of upgrading to widebody captain. This stuff is only complicated because pilots want to screw each other over. Reference "super premium widebody flying."
 
Oh cool, that makes sense! I thought that it was greed and attitude causing more strife than finding equitable solutions.
 
It still shouldn't be complicated, though. Ratio by category and status. A senior Alaska 737 captain should end up being merged into the same spot on the list as senior 737 captains at Delta. He's still a captain, still holding the same bidding power for schedules and vacations, and he doesn't get a windfall of upgrading to widebody captain. This stuff is only complicated because pilots want to screw each other over. Reference "super premium widebody flying."



I was going to ask if they can out language in the contracts about displacing someone or bidding up, but you answered it.

So in the situation you described, how long would the senior 737 guy not be allowed to bid up to 777? Eventually he may want to, so how long is fair? 3 yrs? 5 yrs?
 
How dissimilar were the NWA/Delta seniority lists? Both old airlines, both flew widebody international routes, etc. Would seem to be fairly similar lists. Not arguing Doug's good post about the integration at all but it would be interesting, just for craps and giggles, to see what a DOH integration would look like there as compared to what was done. My guess is it would be far closer to what ended up happening than say a USAir/AWA comparison with such dissimilar seniority lists.
 
How dissimilar were the NWA/Delta seniority lists? Both old airlines, both flew widebody international routes, etc. Would seem to be fairly similar lists. Not arguing Doug's good post about the integration at all but it would be interesting, just for craps and giggles, to see what a DOH integration would look like there as compared to what was done. My guess is it would be far closer to what ended up happening than say a USAir/AWA comparison with such dissimilar seniority lists.

The NWA/Delta lists were very similar, however the Legacy Delta folks think they are superior :). There were some fences for the 777's and 747s. The issue that USAPA is going to have when they make their argument is that they have practically no wide body airplanes.

Expect to see a relative list integration between USAPA/APA (with the America West guys FINALLY getting what they were awarded) with five year fences on the widebodies.
 
The NWA/Delta lists were very similar, however the Delta folks think they are superior :). There were some fences for the 777's and 747s. The issue that USAPA is going to have when they make their argument is that they have practically no wide body airplanes.

Expect to see a relative list integration between USAPA/APA (with the America West guys FINALLY getting what they were awarded) with five year fences on the widebodies.

Follow up: In mergers where there appears, at least superficially, to be similarity - do the airlines run a DOH and a relative seniority integration and compare? For dissimilar - USAir/AWA I would think that's an enormous waste of time - but NWA/Delta maybe not so much.
 
Follow up: In mergers where there appears, at least superficially, to be similarity - do the airlines run a DOH and a relative seniority integration and compare? For dissimilar - USAir/AWA I would think that's an enormous waste of time - but NWA/Delta maybe not so much.

In the merger of Colgan/Mesaba/Pinnacle the Pinnacle Merger Committee was foolish enough to propose straight date of hire. If you look at the award, from that merger, you can see that the arbitrator VERY quickly disregarded that argument and basically told them to 'pound sand' in his award. The USAPA and APA folks can go down the road of DOH, but they are going to waste their time. Mergers today are all about relative seniority with fences on widebodies.
 
It still shouldn't be complicated, though. Ratio by category and status. A senior Alaska 737 captain should end up being merged into the same spot on the list as senior 737 captains at Delta. He's still a captain, still holding the same bidding power for schedules and vacations, and he doesn't get a windfall of upgrading to widebody captain. This stuff is only complicated because pilots want to screw each other over. Reference "super premium widebody flying."

Then blend in a few guys in his situation that convince themselves "Goodbye, 737, hello 747-400!" and then you have the seeds of discontent.
 
Back
Top