Roberts Award, Dynamic Seniority

[~~~^~~~]

Red Tail posted that the Roberts Award was an example of Dynamic Seniority. Reading the sources available on line, the Robert's Award was, a fence. I have not been able to find an example of Dynamic Seniority in practice. Does anyone have a link for further reading?

I've not read once account that supported the Roberts Award and most the authors consider it to be an example of what not to do.

Can others fill in the gaps on what happened to Herman the Goose?

 

[Noserider76]

Do you have time to look up the most recent arbitrated award, the US/AWA one? I know the US guys weren't happy but the bulk of it seems relatively fair to me.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Noserider - yes I read the latest and am intimately familiar with the Arbitrator's work on FedEx/Tigers.

I'm searching for any history of any Dynamic Seniority Awards. I do not think such a thing has ever been awarded.

Thanks.

 

[NuGuy]

Heyas,

My $0.02. Every arbitration is different depending on the facts brought to the table. The arbitrator may, or may not stand on precedent. Using previous mergers is comparing apples and oranges in most cases (especially AAA/AWA).

Just because something is "new", doesn't necessarily mean that it won't be included in an arbitrators decision. It all depends on how the facts are laid out.

I can tell you that the VERY first thing an arbitrator will say is "I STRONGLY recommend the two parties go back to negotiate a mutual agreement."

Nu

 

[Donsa320]

Red Tail posted that the Roberts Award was an example of Dynamic Seniority. Reading the sources available on line, the Robert's Award was, a fence. I have not been able to find an example of Dynamic Seniority in practice. Does anyone have a link for further reading?

I've not read once account that supported the Roberts Award and most the authors consider it to be an example of what not to do.

Can others fill in the gaps on what happened to Herman the Goose?

Your English is kind of convoluted but I take it you have found no support for Tom Roberts' award.
Well I am here to tell you that it was fine for this Green Booker. It only pertained to me for a few years since I was close to retirement but I did get a 747-400 bid out of it. But of course the Red Book protested it and said that the Red Book 744 pilots in the training department should not have been counted for the Red Book quota. So, I get the -200 books. The Green Bookers say wait a minute, send it to Roberts. Roberts says, no, the training dept Capts count so....I go back and get the -400 books. By this time I have about a year left so I just by-pass the training and take the 744 international pay and stay on the A-320. That, I guess, is an example of the terrible constant mediation I see referred to. I really don't think most people on here have any idea of how the Roberts award worked.

 

[michael707767]

That, I guess, is an example of the terrible constant mediation I see referred to. I really don't think most people on here have any idea of how the Roberts award worked.

That is an example of why I think a dynamic list could create problems. I would think everytime a few Delta or NW pilots retired, there would be a battle of who moved up and how much, and it would be arbitrated until the last premerger pilot had retired.

 

[Donsa320]

That is an example of why I think a dynamic list could create problems. I would think everytime a few Delta or NW pilots retired, there would be a battle of who moved up and how much, and it would be arbitrated until the last premerger pilot had retired.

I guess my attempt at satire failed.

What I meant to convey was that my brush with the arbitration was minor. Just the business of the award. If that has to occur with each retirement, well, so be it. A clearly written award would preclude much of that though and even if hearings are necessary from time to time, once claification is made the disputes should diminish.

If NWA/DAL does go to arbitration I hope for all of you that the award is well written. And fair, but that would be an objective opinion undoubtedly not shared by all.