DALPA Conflict of Interest

[ACL65PILOT]

I think that is what both of our unions want us to think. Heck our side still things that we will have a negotiated list.
I am just waiting for the final answer either way.

I move to MSP, but probably not DTW. But we will all deal with whatever is thrown at us.

 

[Fly4hire]

But we will all deal with whatever is thrown at us.

And hopefully be able to drink a frosty one and be friends like with our co-workers like we are now. Another reason I think (hunch) the arbitrators will be much more middle of the road than initial positions taken - the new DAL simply cannot prosper, especially now, with the acrimony of extended partisan bickering over an unbalanced SLI.

 

[PuffDriver]

And hopefully be able to drink a frosty one and be friends like with our co-workers like we are now.

Another reason I think (hunch) the arbitrators will be much more middle of the road than initial positions taken - the new DAL simply cannot prosper, especially now, with the acrimony of extended partisan bickering over an unbalanced SLI.

I love this. On one hand, let's all be friends. On the other hand, if our interpretation is that the list is not fair we are going to burn down the house.

Sorry, you asked for it: Wwwaaahhhh, wwwaaahhhh:crying: :crying:

 

[Fly4hire]

I love this. On one hand, let's all be friends. On the other hand, if our interpretation is that the list is not fair we are going to burn down the house.

Sorry, you asked for it: Wwwaaahhhh, wwwaaahhhh:crying: :crying:

RTFQ - never said burn the house down (was referring to years of interpretation arbitrations and lack of unity) , and I predict you will cause just as much acrimony if you perceive it be unfair as well.

Of course given your "Masters of the Universe" view as articulated here, I think your expectations are going to be a lot harder to meet in the middle on than ours.

As you said - better brace yourself. :bomb:

 

[ACL65PILOT]

It comes down to the ability to separate business from personal views.
Kind of hard in this line of work.

 

[dispatchguy]

the new DAL simply cannot prosper, especially now, with the acrimony of extended partisan bickering over an unbalanced SLI.

Yeah, look at how well the AWE/USA Merger has gone, how much of a lovefest the pilot groups are there, and how much of those merger synergies (that mgt term), and cost savings that they have achieved.

 

[licorice]

Of course given your "Masters of the Universe" view as articulated here, I think your expectations are going to be a lot harder to meet in the middle on than ours.

As you said - better brace yourself. :bomb:[/quote]
DL's position keeps everyone within 2-3% of their original seniority. DOH in my example above results in a loss of 8.5% for DL guy and a gain of 12.3% for the NW guy, both with same hire dates. DOH in 5-7 years would result in a minimum of 800 NW pilots (and ONLY NW pilots!) at the top of the list. Which is more radical... + 2-3% gains/losses or + 8-12% gains/losses? (with 0% gains/losses being the rational goal) Which is more reasonable... a seniority list in 5-7 years with pilots from both groups in the top 800 positions (based on ratios) or a seniority list with 800 of one group's pilots, and 0 of the other group's pilots at the top of the list? (with equal sharing, by proportion, of the top seniority positions [in 5-7 years] being the rational goal)....indeed, brace yourself.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

It is fun to watch play out, to bad it is our lives.

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

The problem I see with the proposal that has been put out, taken down, and now back up is we(nwa) always seem to lose at least 3%. Funny how it worked out that way

As you said - better brace yourself. :bomb:

DL's position keeps everyone within 2-3% of their original seniority. DOH in my example above results in a loss of 8.5% for DL guy and a gain of 12.3% for the NW guy, both with same hire dates. DOH in 5-7 years would result in a minimum of 800 NW pilots (and ONLY NW pilots!) at the top of the list. Which is more radical... + 2-3% gains/losses or + 8-12% gains/losses? (with 0% gains/losses being the rational goal) Which is more reasonable... a seniority list in 5-7 years with pilots from both groups in the top 800 positions (based on ratios) or a seniority list with 800 of one group's pilots, and 0 of the other group's pilots at the top of the list? (with equal sharing, by proportion, of the top seniority positions [in 5-7 years] being the rational goal)....indeed, brace yourself.[/quote]

 

[Superpilot92]

The problem I see with the proposal that has been put out, taken down, and now back up is we(nwa) always seem to lose at least 3%. Funny how it worked out that way

you're right it may be within 1-5% but its always a -% for NWA and a +% for DAL. That's not going to fly with the arbitrators or the NWA side. Cant wait till this is done.

(waiting for puffy to respond childishly )