DAL/NWA SLI Hearings in a nutshell

[~~~^~~~]

We need an employee number thread to avoid the complete crazies.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Funny. Not a bad idea.

 

[AirportBum]

There is no reordering of the lists. A position on the new seniority list is not determined by what a pilot chooses to fly, but rather what his seniority is capable of holding if everyone bid what their seniority can hold.

I'll buy that. Sounds much better when explained that way.

Next question: If the 88's and -9's are the same "category" for integration purposes, shouldn't the most junior DAL 88-holding pilot be down at the bottom with the -9 guys? Still looks like a staple for the bottom 10%. I don't see anything relative about it.

Still optimistic for a middle ground . . . .

 

[AirportBum]

Disregard my above question. I re-read the original post and see that the -9 guys are conveniently the only "small guage" (doesn't do much for the ego ) aircraft.

That certainly justifies a STAPLE of ~ 500 pilots

 

[Truckdriver]

Next question: If the 88's and -9's are the same "category" for integration purposes, shouldn't the most junior DAL 88-holding pilot be down at the bottom with the -9 guys? Still looks like a staple for the bottom 10%. I don't see anything relative about it.

Why should the -9 guys be integrated with the 88 guys. When they park the 9's and furlough 450 guys in the next two years there would be 100 NWA guys furloughed and 350 DAL guys. Pre merger career expectations are a big part of this deal and no pre merger Delta guy should be furloughed as a result of a shrinking NWA DC-9 fleet. That is the whole reason for two days of testimony on the -9 and how it is being replaced by Compass and Mesaba flying. Pre-merger Delta guys shouldn't take the hit for that anymore than we should get the benefit for the NWA retirements.

 

[FDJ2]

quote=Schwanker
The replacement aircraft for the DC-9 was going to be 77-110 seaters, all paying significantly less than the DC-9 and "super" less than the MD-88. It would still be the most junior equipment on the property and therefore should be ranked as such. It's nice you have more knowledge of NWA fleet plans than NWA executives. Maybe you should give Steenland a call and fill him in.

Schwanker, maybe you should review your own MEC's "Across the Table" publication, March 2006 I believe, where it states that the replacement aircraft for the DC-9 will be 77-110 seaters, all of which will pay less than the DC-9.

 

[FDJ2]

It that's the case, it makes you wonder why DALPA took such an extreme preposterous position.

Schwanker

It's consistant with the most recent interpretation of ALPA merger policy, hardly an "extreme".

 

[FDJ2]

So, why organize it based on aircraft category at all? Why not just use the seniority list as a whole?

Not all aircraft categories have the same value. Does the DC-9 position have the same value as the "super premium" 747?

 

[FDJ2]

Next question: If the 88's and -9's are the same "category" for integration purposes, shouldn't the most junior DAL 88-holding pilot be down at the bottom with the -9 guys? Still looks like a staple for the bottom 10%. I don't see anything relative about it.

Still optimistic for a middle ground . . . .

The DC-9 F/O position is the least paying position, on the smallest and oldest airframe, with the shortest range in the combined fleet. Additionally, the DC-9's replacement, according to NALPA, is an even smaller aircraft, that will pay even less.

 

[Superpilot92]

We will accomplish nothing, but Relative by equipment is not extreme. It is a moderate position. We could have gone off in left field and asked for a staple. It is apparent that DALPA is trying to be realistic in its goals.

Stapling the bottom 400 NWA pilots, putting 99 NWA hires behind 2007 DAL hires and 85 NWA hires behind 88 DAL hires is not a "realistic" goal :nuts: . Its ridiculous and i am sure the arbitratiors will see right though the BS that both sides will try and present.

 

[Superpilot92]

Why should the -9 guys be integrated with the 88 guys. When they park the 9's and furlough 450 guys in the next two years there would be 100 NWA guys furloughed and 350 DAL guys. DAL plan is for DC9s to be around till 2012 Pre merger career expectations are a big part of this deal and no pre merger Delta guy should be furloughed as a result of a shrinking NWA DC-9 fleet. Then would you agree that i should be 45% on the list in the next 10-12 years. Afterall that was my pre-merger expectation . That is the whole reason for two days of testimony on the -9 and how it is being replaced by Compass and Mesaba flying. Thats against OUR scope in the new contract and our previous scope language. Pre-merger Delta guys shouldn't take the hit for that anymore than we should get the benefit for the NWA retirements.

Waiting for the middle ground....

 

[FDJ2]

Stapling the bottom 400 NWA pilots, putting 99 NWA hires behind 2007 DAL hires and 85 NWA hires behind 88 DAL hires is not a "realistic" goal :nuts: . Its ridiculous and i am sure the arbitratiors will see right though the BS that both sides will try and present.

The arbitrators will see what the value of each position brought to the merger is and award accordingly. The fact is that a DC-9 F/O position will be the least paying job, on the oldest airframe, with the shortest range in the combined fleet and the DAL '88 hire brings an " extra special super premium wide bodied" captain position to the merger and the NWA '85 hire only brings a "super premium" captain position.

Preserving DOH seniority is not a goal of ALPA merger policy, but preserving status is, so I please explain the relevance of an 88 hire vs a 85 hire outside of the "status" their seniority number at their airline brings to the merger.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Superpilot:

Really, why should Delta pilots be effected at all by the fate of the DC9?

What is your expectation and how high a price should I be expected to pay to protect you from your own aircraft?

In my view it is only logical that as many DC9 pilots as there are, that an equal number of those pilots are on the bottom of the list.

 

[ExAF]

I thought that the list was very fair.

And that's exactly why it is in arbitration. I'm sure the NWA starting proposal will look just as onerous to you as the DAL proposal looks to me. It's all a matter of perspective.

 

[123]

I would guess you might not have reviewed your NWALPA proposal, since it looked like a term paper done the night before it was due.

What was it that caused it to look so bad? The formatting? Length? Poor spelling? Weak grammar?

As far as what you deserve, you should get what your future fleet plan would look like in two years, and yours is losing planes.

If that is what you believe, then I why should all of the current DC-9 pilots be placed at the end of the list? I haven't read anywhere that we are loosing all of the DC-9's in the next 2 years, s

Our retirements will match yours in 5 years, and you getting credit for yours will equal what we should get for ours. So, that would be a wash there.

Would PAM spit out numbers that back up this theory?

Your older pilots will leave with a frozen pension, and that is significant, since you got our better rules (and pay---even though you lost some things like minimum hours and time and a half after 80 hours), and we don't get a pension, ever.

I don't get a pension either, nope zero. Oh, by the way, this merger was not intended to fix the fact that your senior DAL brothers and sisters left early during bk and thus bankrupted your pension plan. We shouldn't have to pay for that, just like you shouldn't have to fix the red/green issue.