News story on SLI NWA and Delta

[MCDU]

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/10/06/pilotstalk/

Enjoy

M

 

[General Lee]

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/10/06/pilotstalk/

Enjoy

M

This is an old article. We have one more group of days for testimony (starting Monday) in LA, and then a decision will be given by Dec 8th, not Nov 20th as the article states.

NWA's lawyer represented USAir East in their arbitration, while our lawyer represented America West. Also, this is the first time NWA has advocated DOH. In the Republic merger, NALPA wanted a ratio list (I've got the testimony to prove it), but Roberts gave DOH with 20 year fences, and we know how fair that was.... With talks with Continental, NALPA also advocated ratios. This is the first time, since they are smaller, that they have wanted DOH. We will see how it goes....



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[dbrownie]

General L

We have received memo that NWA is looking

at a "dynamic list" not pure DOH.


Perhaps a blended list with considerations

for years of service, upcomming retirements?


I hope we get this done and put it behind us.

The 20 year fence re-opens bad wounds for 20

years.

DB

 

[Buzo]

This is an old article. We have one more group of days for testimony (starting Monday) in LA, and then a decision will be given by Dec 8th, not Nov 20th as the article states.

NWA's lawyer represented USAir East in their arbitration, while our lawyer represented America West. Also, this is the first time NWA has advocated DOH. In the Republic merger, NALPA wanted a ratio list (I've got the testimony to prove it), but Roberts gave DOH with 20 year fences, and we know how fair that was.... With talks with Continental, NALPA also advocated ratios. This is the first time, since they are smaller, that they have wanted DOH. We will see how it goes....



Bye Bye---General Lee

The hearings actually started yesterday, and conclude on monday.

 

[General Lee]

The hearings actually started yesterday, and conclude on monday.

Really? I thought they started on the 17th?


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

General L

We have received memo that NWA is looking

at a "dynamic list" not pure DOH.


Perhaps a blended list with considerations

for years of service, upcomming retirements?


I hope we get this done and put it behind us.

The 20 year fence re-opens bad wounds for 20

years.

DB

Well, a dynamic list would have to be done for both parties, because NWA's retirements in the short term are less in number than the DL retirements in the long term. That wouldn't really make sense, and people moving from one spot in the list to another, and then other people leap frogging them would be a logistical nightmare. Attrition has NEVER been used in any SLI, and that was stated on the stand.

I don't think there will be any long fences either. Delta doesn't want that, and probably is pushing for the shortest fences as possible.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Schwanker]

Well, a dynamic list would have to be done for both parties, because NWA's retirements in the short term are less in number than the DL retirements in the long term. That wouldn't really make sense, and people moving from one spot in the list to another, and then other people leap frogging them would be a logistical nightmare. Attrition has NEVER been used in any SLI, and that was stated on the stand.

I don't think there will be any long fences either. Delta doesn't want that, and probably is pushing for the shortest fences as possible.

Bye Bye--General Lee

A dynamic list wouldn't be hard at all. NWA pilots would only fill NWA positions and DAL pilots would only fill DAL positions--indefinitely. You would always advance with attrition from your pre-merger list.

IE....
Former DAL pilots would always hold positions 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12......
Former NWA pilots would always hold positions 2, 5, 7, 9, 10.....

It would be approx 7 DAL positions per 5 NWA positions and one would only move into those positions reserved for his/her list as attrition occurs. The designateed slots at the bottom of each list would expire with each retirement.

A concept such as this was discussed while working towards a negotiated settlement. Apparently, the arbitrators found it interesting enough that they left the floor open if any one was interested in introducing this concept as the arbitrated list would only consist of testimony from the arbitration process and not the mediated negotiations.

Schwanker

 

[General Lee]

A dynamic list wouldn't be hard at all. NWA pilots would only fill NWA positions and DAL pilots would only fill DAL positions--indefinitely. You would always advance with attrition from your pre-merger list.

IE....
Former DAL pilots would always hold positions 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12......
Former NWA pilots would always hold positions 2, 5, 7, 9, 10.....

It would be approx 7 DAL positions per 5 NWA positions and one would only move into those positions reserved for his/her list as attrition occurs. The designateed slots at the bottom of each list would expire with each retirement.

A concept such as this was discussed while working towards a negotiated settlement. Apparently, the arbitrators found it interesting enough that they left the floor open if any one was interested in introducing this concept as the arbitrated list would only consist of testimony from the arbitration process and not the mediated negotiations.

Schwanker

Did USAir East pilots get a Dynamic list? No, no they did not. Did they want one? Yes. Didn't your own lawyer represent them too? Yes, yes he did. I doubt you will get one. Where are all of those retirements you said would happen, anyway?

And, a negotiated settlement has NOT happen. I wonder why? The arbitrators are probably all ears when it comes to any idea, but that doesn't mean they have to start a new trend that has never been done before. We obviously didn't go for it, or there would have been a settlement. We probably gave good reasons why....probably because it always would divide the group. There would always be that "deal" in the backround. (Kinda just like the Roberts award and the 20 year fence krap)

Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Schwanker]

Did USAir East pilots get a Dynamic list? No, no they did not. Did they want one? Yes. Didn't your own lawyer represent them too? Yes, yes he did. I doubt you will get one. Where are all of those retirements you said would happen, anyway?

And, a negotiated settlement has NOT happen. I wonder why? The arbitrators are probably all ears when it comes to any idea, but that doesn't mean they have to start a new trend that has never been done before. We obviously didn't go for it, or there would have been a settlement. We probably gave good reasons why....

Bye Bye---General Lee

You don't need to sell me anything on this board...your merger committee needs to sell your position to the arbitrators. Apparently, the arbitrators were receptive to the idea of a dynamic list. I'm not sure why you insist NWA is a USAir replica, but you know quite well NWA was not a failing enterprise which DAL rescued and you also know quite well the list awarded in that case is widely criticized by everyone except form AWA pilots. I sure hope you don't expect a repeat or you may end up in a severe depression.

Why is your sided against dynamic seniorty? It's because the attrition at NWA is much greater than DAL. I've looked at the crystal ball, and I fair much better under relative with dynamic than with DOH. This is strictly due to NWA attitrion. Everyone's mileage will differ depending on several variables (age, DOH, hiring patterns...). You like to preach DAL retirements are superior long term to NWA. If so, you should be in favor of the dynamic concept as well--but you're not. Wonder why? Fortunately, three wise men will give us a list in a few weeks. If you really have your hopes up for your slotted ratios, I know some good anti-suicide counselors who can help you out. It just isn't going to happen. When asked if placing 2008 hires ahead of 2000 hires was fair, you own DALPA rep couldn't even answer the question. You lost a lot of credibility with the arbitrators with DALPA's lopsided proposal. Truth will be shown soon enough. Take care.
Schwanker

 

[Schwanker]

Where are all of those retirements you said would happen, anyway?

Bye Bye---General Lee

BTW, you'll never see anywhere where I claimed there to be huge retirements prior to DCC. I read it as well, but I think there was some kool-aide drinking going on.

Back to USAir/AWA, is it your position this was a good SLI award? That's an easy yes/no question.

Also, do you equate NWA with USAir going into their merger? Another easy one.

Schwanker

 

[General Lee]

You don't need to sell me anything on this board...your merger committee needs to sell your position to the arbitrators. Apparently, the arbitrators were receptive to the idea of a dynamic list. I'm not sure why you insist NWA is a USAir replica, but you know quite well NWA was not a failing enterprise which DAL rescued and you also know quite well the list awarded in that case is widely criticized by everyone except form AWA pilots. I sure hope you don't expect a repeat or you may end up in a severe depression.

Why is your sided against dynamic seniorty? It's because the attrition at NWA is much greater than DAL. I've looked at the crystal ball, and I fair much better under relative with dynamic than with DOH. This is strictly due to NWA attitrion. Everyone's mileage will differ depending on several variables (age, DOH, hiring patterns...). You like to preach DAL retirements are superior long term to NWA. If so, you should be in favor of the dynamic concept as well--but you're not. Wonder why? Fortunately, three wise men will give us a list in a few weeks. If you really have your hopes up for your slotted ratios, I know some good anti-suicide counselors who can help you out. It just isn't going to happen. When asked if placing 2008 hires ahead of 2000 hires was fair, you own DALPA rep couldn't even answer the question. You lost a lot of credibility with the arbitrators with DALPA's lopsided proposal. Truth will be shown soon enough. Take care.
Schwanker

I can tell you your attrition is greater in the near term, not the long term. I have the numbers to prove it. As far as the arbitrators go, they have to be sold on certain ideas, and I am sure they will listen to anything. And, our lopsided proposal was given a lot of credibility last week. I can't really go into what was shown. Anyway, the truth will be shown soon, and the USAir model isn't only used for who was failing and who wasn't, but for like sized carriers. USAir was failing, but still got the top 500 spots thanks to what it brought to the merged company. You can try to say our case is different, but not in every way. If we expanded (paid money for 17 AA 757ERs while Steenland horded cash and looked for a merger partner) and hired a lot of pilots, should they all go behind your furloughed pilots? Is that fair? I think our Dalpa rep could answer that. That was Steenland holding back expansion, and that wasn't our fault. Looking forward to getting this over with too, and no suicide counselors needed over here. I still haven't seen any testimony favoring your side at all, except the thing you guys are placing all bets on---Bloch saying "we are equals."


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Noserider76]

A dynamic list wouldn't be hard at all. NWA pilots would only fill NWA positions and DAL pilots would only fill DAL positions--indefinitely. You would always advance with attrition from your pre-merger list.

IE....
Former DAL pilots would always hold positions 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12......
Former NWA pilots would always hold positions 2, 5, 7, 9, 10.....

It would be approx 7 DAL positions per 5 NWA positions and one would only move into those positions reserved for his/her list as attrition occurs. The designateed slots at the bottom of each list would expire with each retirement.

A concept such as this was discussed while working towards a negotiated settlement. Apparently, the arbitrators found it interesting enough that they left the floor open if any one was interested in introducing this concept as the arbitrated list would only consist of testimony from the arbitration process and not the mediated negotiations.

Schwanker

I'm assuming you mean this dynamic list, to be fair of course, would have to have NW guys moving up on the aircraft they bring to the merger (and their replacements), and DL guys moving up on the aircraft they bring (and replacements) as their respective attrition occurs. I would be fine with that. A long term fence, in effect, where we protect the equipment and retirements we expected pre-merger.

I still can't believe I'm reading the term "Premium flying" in the hearing. What a load of horse dung.

 

[Superpilot92]

these arguments are beyond pointless


back to football and beer for me :beer:

 

[Noserider76]

these arguments are beyond pointless
back to football and beer for me :beer:

True, but it is interesting and sometimes eye-opening to see what some people's version of fair is. I'm hoping the Charger's defense shows up in Pittsburg today.

 

[General Lee]

BTW, you'll never see anywhere where I claimed there to be huge retirements prior to DCC. I read it as well, but I think there was some kool-aide drinking going on.

Back to USAir/AWA, is it your position this was a good SLI award? That's an easy yes/no question.

Also, do you equate NWA with USAir going into their merger? Another easy one.

Schwanker

It was a fair award, since it took into account what was brought to the table, and gave the remaining pilots a position that they were in before the merger. If you were the bottom USAIr East pilot or the bottom AWA guy, you stayed at the bottom. The top 500 guys benefited because they brought something that was not had at AWA prior to the merger.

As far as equating NWA with USAir, not totally. I look at it as two equal sized companies (AWA and USAir were very close in size). One brought INTL into the picture, and the other one was a little more stable financially when they merged. As Bloch says, we are equal financially (not one saving the other), and we both fly INTL flights, but one is bringing more widebodies and newer planes, with more orders that will come to fruition. The other has older planes that will retire sooner, and those planes pay the least. Bringing a lot of the lowest paying plane should place someone at the bottom as a majority, and I think that is one of the reasons why we went with relative seniority after the bottom 400. The credibility of our stance increased a bit last week, and we will have to see how it goes.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[nwaredtail]

The credibility of our stance increased a bit last week, and we will have to see how it goes.

I heard just the opposite. Funny how that works. Glad to see you think your award is just because of what attorney you are using. Your arguments are laughable.

 

[Helos2Galaxy]

It's kind of like NWALPA is holding a duece and a five and going ALL IN. Sometimes it works ;-)

 

[clippyrip]

It's kind of like NWALPA is holding a duece and a five and going ALL IN. Sometimes it works ;-)

I think of it more like a game of Hearts. DALPA is attempting to shoot the moon. It will work great if the arbitrators give you the moon and not so much if they don't. We'll see....

It might be worth mentally prepping for something less then what your boys have decided to stick their feet in the sand on.

 

[General Lee]

I think of it more like a game of Hearts. DALPA is attempting to shoot the moon. It will work great if the arbitrators give you the moon and not so much if they don't. We'll see....

It might be worth mentally prepping for something less then what your boys have decided to stick their feet in the sand on.

You guys have ditched DOH and are now looking for a dynamic list. I think you are the ones grasping. And, I just read the transcripts for 11-15 (I thought the hearings started tomorrow, and I was wrong...), and I thought our guy did a great job equating the 767ER to the A330, and throwing our salaries and the differences between them in there. RH did a fantastic job. NALPA switching tactics in the last inning sure shows something...... and the dynamic list would divide us for another 15 years---another redbook/greenbook scenario. I guess those guys are just comfortable having different factions in a "family." Come on!! Let's all just get together for one big hug!!!

Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

I heard just the opposite. Funny how that works. Glad to see you think your award is just because of what attorney you are using. Your arguments are laughable.

No, it proved something someone couldn't remember. Funny how that works sometimes...We'll see.....


Bye Bye--General Lee