AA's Priorities

[CitationLover]

Please don't generalize. I did not accept the flush back. Also, believe it or not, I did not staple the poor OZ pilots.

huh? i'm paying the twa guys a complement.

 

[aa73]

That wide body fence was still in effect when we were bought by AA, it didn't end in 7 years (1993?). DOH and being stapled is a huge difference. DOH is what every pilot has to his name, the only thing. Being stapled shows true contempt for the stapled group. We got the hint: We are untermensch. We get it. Thank God some have options now that other carriers are hiring. I think the last 747 flight may have had a PFE, which would have been a TWA guy.

PKober - I am not an advocate of staple jobs, and I don't believe there should ever be any stapling in any merger/acquisition. But believe it or not, OZ's DOH WAS an 80% staple job - however you want to call it, the bottom 80% of the TWA seniority list in 1986 was OZ. The TWA MEC knew that little fact very well, so it goes to show that DOH is not always the best solution. Just imagine if AWA/US goes DOH... can you say a 95% AWA staple job?

That said, the 7 year widebody fence deal I was talking about meant that OZ pilots could START bidding the widebodies in 7 years (1992-1993?) But I guess the fence never really came down, huh?

 

[100 c.i.]

PKober - I am not an advocate of staple jobs, and I don't believe there should ever be any stapling in any merger/acquisition. But believe it or not, OZ's DOH WAS an 80% staple job - however you want to call it, the bottom 80% of the TWA seniority list in 1986 was OZ. The TWA MEC knew that little fact very well, so it goes to show that DOH is not always the best solution. Just imagine if AWA/US goes DOH... can you say a 95% AWA staple job?

That said, the 7 year widebody fence deal I was talking about meant that OZ pilots could START bidding the widebodies in 7 years (1992-1993?) But I guess the fence never really came down, huh?

Not true you need to review your data or lack of. Beside it doesnt matter the harms done.

 

[aa73]

Not true you need to review your data or lack of.

OK... can you please elaborate on where I'm wrong? This is data I've gotten from flying with ex TWA and ex OZ guys for over a year, and they all had similar info.

Beside it doesnt matter the harms done.

No doubt. But we can always learn from the past, regardless of which merger/acquisition...

73

 

[AAslag]

huh? i'm paying the twa guys a complement.

Understood, nevermind.:0

 

[pkober]

PKober - I am not an advocate of staple jobs, and I don't believe there should ever be any stapling in any merger/acquisition. But believe it or not, OZ's DOH WAS an 80% staple job - however you want to call it, the bottom 80% of the TWA seniority list in 1986 was OZ. The TWA MEC knew that little fact very well, so it goes to show that DOH is not always the best solution. Just imagine if AWA/US goes DOH... can you say a 95% AWA staple job?

That said, the 7 year widebody fence deal I was talking about meant that OZ pilots could START bidding the widebodies in 7 years (1992-1993?) But I guess the fence never really came down, huh?

The fence never came down and that was total BS for the OZ guys.

DOH is the only fair way to do it. If a pilot was hired at US in 1988 he should never be junior to a AWA pilot hired in 2003, for example. Same with any airline. APA knew the facts also. That's why guys like me, 1996 hire, are on the street (not me anymore, but my fellow TWA'ers) while AA guys hired in 1999 are still working. Maybe it should have been done by relative senority at your respective airline?

But you know what, what difference does it make now. It won't change. I believe that the buying airline will always win. Period. In the end BOTH sides will feel screwed.

Fly safe. Peace!!

 

[aa73]

I agree that DOH should always be attempted... but in some cases, a DOH integration can result in a seniority windfall for a particularly senior group of pilots, while the other airline could have a relatively junior pilot group. This could result in a lopsided integration. This, then would be the case in the AWA/US merger... the most junior USAir pilot is a 1988 hire, which is only 4 more years than the most senior AWA pilot! So in that case, 90% of AWA pilots would end up at the bottom of the new list. I don't think an arbitartor would go for that.

Relative seniority is the next best thing, followed by a ratio integration. It is my personal belief that AWA/US will go by relative seniority.

Like you implied, it's the dog-eat-dog ugly side of the airline world. I hope you (CAL) guys don't merge with UAL, that would be a major clusterflock!

Take care, thanks for the informative posts.
73

 

[My name is EARL]

What should happen in these mergers is that you take 5 line pilots (keep the union leaders out) from each of the merging airline. Have them sit down and they will come out with a list that would work for everyone. Its just like in our government when the politicains get envolved it gets draged out. I feel that the pilots from each airline would be more willing to accept a decision by there fellow line pilots.

 

[XTW]

What should happen in these mergers is that you take 5 line pilots (keep the union leaders out) from each of the merging airline. Have them sit down and they will come out with a list that would work for everyone. Its just like in our government when the politicains get envolved it gets draged out. I feel that the pilots from each airline would be more willing to accept a decision by there fellow line pilots.

If only it were that easy.


X

 

[JP4user]

No..put all 5 pilots in a large cage and let the survivors decide where to place the loser's comrades.

To the victor goes the spoils.