Latest DAL/NWA arbitration debates

[~~~^~~~]

Fact is you are either lying or full of crap. You choose.

Then you won't mind a dynamic list, because you wouldn't of had NWA retirements anyway, right?

Your witness, not mine.

Use a pure relative seniority by equipment & dynamic until the day the last current seniority list pilot retires, that is fine by me. Do you remember the fair plan I proposed? Most of the NWA pilots liked it. Search "Fair Seniority Integration" and it should come up.

Problems are that no arbitrator will award and no company can work a relative list. The training costs while everyone plays leapfrog in Toga's and the staffing problems doom the concept.

 

[nwaredtail]

Your witness, not mine.

Use a pure relative seniority by equipment & dynamic until the day the last current seniority list pilot retires, that is fine by me. Do you remember the fair plan I proposed? Most of the NWA pilots liked it. Search "Fair Seniority Integration" and it should come up.

You are making stuff up, but that is par for the course over this SLI process from you and GL. Should surprise nobody. Print the testimony.

Problems are that no arbitrator will award and no company can work a relative list. The training costs while everyone plays leapfrog in Toga's and the staffing problems doom the concept.

So you are saying the training cost to train a pilot increases? OMG, are you a fricking retard? It costs exactly the same because we all have the same training freezes etc. NWA dealt with the 20 year roberts award just fine, it's called a computer.

BTW, from what I can see, there must be a reason the arbitrators wanted to learn more about a dynamic list.

 

[~~~^~~~]

The only thing I "made up" was my willingness to accept your idea, if you were willing to start with status quo and keep your dynamic concept until we both retire.

The discussion in the arbitration proceeding as to why dynamic would be difficult to implement is common sense. One side moving, then the other, is going to set off more training cycles and make it more difficult to staff the business.

Of course, your green book pilots will probably retire off of smaller equipment, so it isn't like we are talking 777 or 747 retirements that effect a whole lot of people in the stovepipe.

 

[NuGuy]

And another nail in Dynamic's Coffin:
Quote:
Q. No other airline has a dynamic
9 seniority list advice, do they?
10 A. Not that I'm aware of.

I LOVE this response. By your same reasoning, we shouldn't even be flying at all, because in 1903, "flyin' machines" hadn't been invented by someone else already.

New merger, new ideas. Think outside the box. The arbitrators are NOT bound by precendent, nor are they restricted to only what has been done before. They could make an award based on wang/breast size, and be fully within their rights to do so.

Several of our pilots were at the hearing, and listened to the comments between the parties and the arbitrators, and there is strong ancedotal evidence that this is where the award is heading.

Time to play "lets make a deal". I see a negotiated settlement more likely now than ever.

Nu

 

[~~~^~~~]

Wow, that is not the impression I got from reading the transcript. But I have no huge hang up with dynamic as I do want to preserve the NWA guys status quo.

But, if Dynamic is used, then we have to begin with a ratio by equipment that recognizes today's status quo.

But, I think dynamic as a concept is dead. It has been tried before, but has never been implemented in any labor situation. Bloch (as luck would have it) is the only labor expert who has any experience with a dynamic list. He presided over an integration where the two sides volunteered to try dynamic, but who then never implemented it. The airline failed, so we don't know how it would have turned out.

"Attrition has not been accepted as an inherent equity in SLI proceedings before," so I think it is a bit of a curiosity.

 

[michael707767]

As you are aware, the DAL proposal calls for a separate aircraft type for the DC9 FOs.

For me, the highlight of the day was Mr. Katz last questions for a DAL rep. It went something like this;

Katz: Captain ________, you are an MD88 captain. Is that correct?

DAL Rep: That is correct, sir.

Katz: What does it say on your license?

DAL Rep: A310, B767/757, Uh......DC-9.

the 764 and the 767 have the same type. Should they be treated the same?

 

[TWA Dude]

I think that even the FAA would have issues with you going from a non-FMC platform to a FMC platform, leg by leg. There is a lot of issues with that.

Not so. TWA had both glass and steam-gage MD80s in a common fleet. No big deal.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

nwaredtail.... have you ever actually been in the cockpit of an md-88 and compared it to a 9?

Even the 717 is also a DC-9 type rating... I don't know how the FAA signed off to that one at all.

Regardless... your point is very lost on those of us who actually know both aircraft groups... it would be dangerous to have the same pilots transition from type to type in between legs.

 

[nwaredtail]

nwaredtail.... have you ever actually been in the cockpit of an md-88 and compared it to a 9?

Even the 717 is also a DC-9 type rating... I don't know how the FAA signed off to that one at all.

Regardless... your point is very lost on those of us who actually know both aircraft groups... it would be dangerous to have the same pilots transition from type to type in between legs.

aircraft types is not what the merger committees were discussing. i agree you shouldnt go between the these two types. Dangerous? this I disagree with.

 

[Noserider76]

Fact is you are either lying or full of crap. You choose.

Nice. You called him a liar or full of crap in one post and a retard in another. You're a real piece of .... work. Are you sure you don't work on the ramp?

Fact is any dynamic list would have to take everyone currently on the list through retirement and separate the equipment we bring to the merger and its replacement. A 15 year dynamic list just happens to expire right when DL retirements are at a peak relative to NW. Your guys have appeared utterly self-serving through this entire process and have done nothing at all for the combined pilot group. You're very fortunate you weren't dealing with another group like your own.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Dyanamic list... notta chance that will happen. Keep dreaming.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

aircraft types is not what the merger committees were discussing. i agree you shouldnt go between the these two types. Dangerous? this I disagree with.

I didn't see the context, nor did you post the context.

Guaranteed there would be plenty of violations at the least if guys were transitioning back and forth between the diesels and the maddogs.

 

[aircowboy]

You guys really don't understand how arbitration works.

I am suprised the Delta pilots don't seem to care about this integration. I was at the hearing on Saturday the 15th and there were about 35 NorthWest onlookers and only 2 Delta guys in a DELTA Base. Must not be very important.

Back to the point. Idiots like General Lee don't seem to understand how arbitration works. I suggest you read Blochs opening comments on the 15th. When the Arbitrators make an award they are not allowed to go outside of what was presented. They can't just pull an idea out of their ace and implement it. For this reason Bloch and Co. could only choose the unfair Delta static plan or the little more fair DOH NWA proposal. The Arbitrators wanted more then a choice between two bad choices and asked the groups to make an alternate proposal on dynamic seniority, (which any idiot will see is 100 percent fair because everyone gets exactly what they would have before the merger).
Your geniuses on the Delta Merger Committee rejected the opportunity to present an alternate (they want a windfall or nothing) and spent the day trying to say the same old "NWA got a pay rate raise so we get their attrition and seniority",

NWA showed good faith and obliged Bloch with a alternate proposal. By the way, your lawyer tried to say it stapled 1/3 of the Delta guys on the bottom which was absolutely not true. At one point the Delta guys are where they would have been pre-merger......on the bottom of THEIR equipment and the list 5 years later reverses the trend as Delta retirements begin.

How is it unfair for everyone to get exactly what they expected. The Fact your guys are against Dynamic shows their arrogance and their desire for a windfall.
In a Dynamic with restrictions a NWA guy retires a NWA guy gets his spot on NWA aircraft. A Delta guy retires a Delta Guy gets his slot on a Delta aircraft......so tell me again how this is not fair.

Our witness was trying to explain the reversal when your lawyer said the abomination quote.

The fact is our retirements at NWA are happening sooner then yours and then yours will kick in, be patient and you will get there exactly as EXPECTED!

The arguments your team are putting up are weak..."its never been done before" thats "never been considered before" each merger has unique parameters to consider and the fact most have been ugly suggests a new direction. I think the Arbitrators hear what the Delta guys are really saying......."whine sniffle, we are Delta we deserve a windfall". Good luck with that!!! I predict dynamic will be the way.

 

[SpauldingSmails]

Not so. TWA had both glass and steam-gage MD80s in a common fleet. No big deal.

Doesn't SWA essentially do the same with their 737-300/500 series aircraft and the 700 series?

 

[NuGuy]

the 764 and the 767 have the same type. Should they be treated the same?

The 757 and the 767 also have the same type, and they're treated the same, so, what's your point?

The whole FMS/steam gauge is argument is laughable.

At PDT, we had EFIS and steam gauge aircraft. One type had a RNAV unit, and the other had a GPS/FMS. Pilots went back and forth leg by leg. Pilots got one day of differences ground school...not even any OE.

The MD-88 really isn't even full EFIS, in the Airbus, or even RJ sense of the term. It's that sort-of EFIS that's really just a EADI and EHSI with an FMS thrown in. Yawn.

Nu

 

[Noserider76]

How is it unfair for everyone to get exactly what they expected. The Fact your guys are against Dynamic shows their arrogance and their desire for a windfall.

In a Dynamic with restrictions a NWA guy retires a NWA guy gets his spot on NWA aircraft. A Delta guy retires a Delta Guy gets his slot on a Delta aircraft......so tell me again how this is not fair.

It would be a great way of doing it if it ran until every pilot on the list retires and completely separated current equipment and it's replacement. 15 years just happens to let NW enjoy their retirements (good) and also enjoy a good portion of the greater number of DL retirements after the 15 year point. A true dynamic list would allow DL guys only to fly the larger guage equipment we bring and then take sole advantage of our larger number of retirements from 10 years on while you do the same with yours. In other words it's a lifetime fence which is fine with almost everyone here. Unfortunately that's not what your guys proposed.

If you're hoping for this, I think you'll be dissapointed. I think what you'll see is a ratio that allows all to share the gains and pains on some equal basis on a single list.

 

[nwaredtail]

You guys really don't understand how arbitration works.

I am suprised the Delta pilots don't seem to care about this integration. I was at the hearing on Saturday the 15th and there were about 35 NorthWest onlookers and only 2 Delta guys in a DELTA Base. Must not be very important.

Back to the point. Idiots like General Lee don't seem to understand how arbitration works. I suggest you read Blochs opening comments on the 15th. When the Arbitrators make an award they are not allowed to go outside of what was presented. They can't just pull an idea out of their ace and implement it. For this reason Bloch and Co. could only choose the unfair Delta static plan or the little more fair DOH NWA proposal. The Arbitrators wanted more then a choice between two bad choices and asked the groups to make an alternate proposal on dynamic seniority, (which any idiot will see is 100 percent fair because everyone gets exactly what they would have before the merger).
Your geniuses on the Delta Merger Committee rejected the opportunity to present an alternate (they want a windfall or nothing) and spent the day trying to say the same old "NWA got a pay rate raise so we get their attrition and seniority",

NWA showed good faith and obliged Bloch with a alternate proposal. By the way, your lawyer tried to say it stapled 1/3 of the Delta guys on the bottom which was absolutely not true. At one point the Delta guys are where they would have been pre-merger......on the bottom of THEIR equipment and the list 5 years later reverses the trend as Delta retirements begin.

How is it unfair for everyone to get exactly what they expected. The Fact your guys are against Dynamic shows their arrogance and their desire for a windfall.
In a Dynamic with restrictions a NWA guy retires a NWA guy gets his spot on NWA aircraft. A Delta guy retires a Delta Guy gets his slot on a Delta aircraft......so tell me again how this is not fair.

Our witness was trying to explain the reversal when your lawyer said the abomination quote.

The fact is our retirements at NWA are happening sooner then yours and then yours will kick in, be patient and you will get there exactly as EXPECTED!

The arguments your team are putting up are weak..."its never been done before" thats "never been considered before" each merger has unique parameters to consider and the fact most have been ugly suggests a new direction. I think the Arbitrators hear what the Delta guys are really saying......."whine sniffle, we are Delta we deserve a windfall". Good luck with that!!! I predict dynamic will be the way.

Very well written and exactly what is happening. As far as Delta not offering any other way of making this happen, all that I can say is, "isn't this what USAIR did?"

Thanks for going to the meeting. You would think LAX being a DAL base, more of their pilots would show support for the guys trying to get them a windfall.

 

[~~~^~~~]

AirCowboy,

Sincerely, thanks for at least reading and understanding, which is more than most folks do.

The "Abomination" quote was a swipe at your Atty. A NWA witness used to the term first to describe the Delta proposed ratio.

I for one agree with the status quo benefit of the dynamic concept. As long as it is started from a fair ratio that recognizes pay differences and current equipment. The problem is in the implementation and duration. NWA wants to cut it off before the Delta retirements kick in.

And of course, we have to spit growth airplanes if we are going to keep the list split.

We are not hearing much about this set of facts:

11 The third take-away is, as we said
12 before, Northwest has had a significant loss
13 of aircraft in 2008 starting in January,
14 April, June, and then a further briefing to
15 their board of directors in September. And
16 then overall that would cause, on a
17 stand-alone basis, Northwest would go through
18 2009 with many fewer jobs than they started in
19 2008.

Management came to us sometime in
22 September and said unless we hire more pilots
23 now, we're going to bust through the TLV
24 requirements for the MD-88 co-pilot position.
25 And we have done an analysis that
2 showed -- a comprehensive analysis that showed
3 the degree of overstaffing at Northwest. And
4 so given that information, when management
5 came to us we agreed to waive that section of
6 the contract to allow Delta to understaff the
7 MD-88 co-pilot category for a certain period
8 of time in anticipation of future events.

The problem continues to be that NWA comes to the party with more pilots than jobs and that scares the Delta side when NWA tries to stick Delta pilots below the DC9 guys. We've been trying to hold slots open for your pilots ... not that anyone has got on this board and thanked Delta's MD88 pilots who are working their butts off to make that possible.

Again, I've got no problem with NWA pilots getting the benefit of NWA retirements.

I think it is most likely the arbitrators will award a ratio and figure the increased pay more than makes up for attrition. That's what has been done over and over again in the past.

 

[~~~^~~~]

there's been major fleet reductions in
21 2008. In January in that memo that we just
22 referenced, that was where they initially
23 announced the loss of 33 DC-9s and three
24 freighters.
25 In April, there was an additional
TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
Page 2725
1 PILOTS OF NORTHWEST - DELTA ARBITRATION
2 announcement of ten more DC-9s, four A-320's
3 and three 757s. And then in June of 2008
4 there was an additional announcement of seven,
5 757s.
6 In September of 2008 the Northwest
7 management made a presentation to their board
8 of directors about their future fleet plan
9 that contained some further reductions, even
10 from that June memo that had been sent out....
Captain Stevens had talked
5 about and there was a range of 250 to 300
6 furloughs that Northwest management had
7 communicated to Captain Stevens.

 

[nwaredtail]

there's been major fleet reductions in
21 2008. In January in that memo that we just
22 referenced, that was where they initially
23 announced the loss of 33 DC-9s and three
24 freighters.
25 In April, there was an additional
TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
Page 2725
1 PILOTS OF NORTHWEST - DELTA ARBITRATION
2 announcement of ten more DC-9s, four A-320's
3 and three 757s. And then in June of 2008
4 there was an additional announcement of seven,
5 757s.
6 In September of 2008 the Northwest
7 management made a presentation to their board
8 of directors about their future fleet plan
9 that contained some further reductions, even
10 from that June memo that had been sent out....
Captain Stevens had talked
5 about and there was a range of 250 to 300
6 furloughs that Northwest management had
7 communicated to Captain Stevens.

Any logical person knows that any fleet announcements after the merger announcement date (which all of these were) were driven by mother Delta. Any reductions will be shared by the combined group, as has been the case in almost all previous cases. How many planes did Delta announce they were parking a few months ago, 17ish I think I remember.