Airtran Pilots, Don't buy that new house yet..

[FlyinGuy]

DOH and Keep your seats!!!! Someone is smoking crack when they use this and "fair and equitable" in the same sentence. How is it fair and equitable when an AT guy will keep his seat, get a huge raise, and get about a 4-5 year bump in seniority. That is not reality. So when we make these long and hart felt appealing post, let's make sure they include a dose of reality next time!

 

[GuppyWN]

Take a breath brother. In through the nose.......... out through the mouth!

Gup

 

[Kharma Police]

Why does it hurt so bad when I bite my tongue?

Gup

Deleted

 

[FlyinGuy]

Thanks for the tip Gup.

 

[Mongolikecandy]

I find it funny how guys on both sides are getting wrapped around the axle over something (SLI) that hasn't even happened yet. Let the process work itself out and then we can all biitch about how our MECs screwed us. Then, like everyone else has been saying, first round is on me. Cheers.

 

[Kharma Police]

DOH and Keep your seats!!!! Someone is smoking crack when they use this and "fair and equitable" in the same sentence. How is it fair and equitable when an AT guy will keep his seat, get a huge raise, and get about a 4-5 year bump in seniority. That is not reality. So when we make these long and hart felt appealing post, let's make sure they include a dose of reality next time!

If you kept the same relative senority as you had before, then out of curiosity, how would it hurt you?

 

[Cometman]

If you kept the same relative senority as you had before, then out of curiosity, how would it hurt you?

Correct me if I am wrong. If an AT guy is number one on his list with relative senority he would be close to number one with SWA? If that is the case then you would have a guy that was hired in about 1993 next to guy that was hired in 1975. Would that be a fair system?

 

[Kharma Police]

Correct me if I am wrong. If an AT guy is number one on his list with relative senority he would be close to number one with SWA? If that is the case then you would have a guy that was hired in about 1993 next to guy that was hired in 1975. Would that be a fair system?

I understand how your point can breed some resentment however I still don't see how it would impact your career progression or bidding with a ratio integration. An arbitrator will not only look at pay but also career progression to which an argument can be made for a six year AirTran FO that will no longer be upgrading but will have to wait an additional six years to get to the left seat. I understand he will be making more money but pay is only one variable out of many that an arbitrator will factor in.

BTW, not that it matters, unless a lot of your senior pilots want to move to Georgia but the number one guy at AirTran as well as many senior pilots live in Atlanta.

 

[Splert]

I understand he will be making more money but pay is only one variable out of many that an arbitrator will factor in.

In this business the future has a Net Present Value of zero.

Projected grade times are pure fiction.

 

[DougCorp-9]

Correct me if I am wrong. If an AT guy is number one on his list with relative senority he would be close to number one with SWA? If that is the case then you would have a guy that was hired in about 1993 next to guy that was hired in 1975. Would that be a fair system?

You do realize that DOH has nothing to do with seniority don't you? You don't bid a line, base , vacation or anything else based on your DOH. DOH only affects your longevity for pay, pass privileges, ect. Longevity and seniority are not interrelated.