NW/DL (and ultimately affecting ALL of us): The Flaw With "Career Expectations"

[General Lee]

A lot of what you talk about is fantasy. I think phrogs4ever has it about right. You shouldn't gain anything that you didn't have before the merger, and that would favor relative percentage. Delta also has a lot more widebodies and the pay that goes along with them, while Northwest has a lot of the lowest paying equipment, the DC9. That will be looked at by the arbitrators I would speculate. And, I think United does the social security number also for class seniority.

He won't listen to any "reason".

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Voice Of Reason]

a.) DOB is no longer used. It's some random version of low (or high) SSN now.

b.) everyone is equal now as far as I know. NW guys also get pay longevity for the time they were furloughed as well (huge for them) as DL always had.

c.) it's in arbitration.

See this is the SAME bypass of the issues I am talking about that haven't been answered....

re: DOBirth: Most DL pilots except post 9-11 I believe are by Date of BIRTH within their classes. All of NW I believe are Date of birth within their class. Are they planning to make this small group at DL that has this off kilter rule equal?

re: longevity.,, AS I STATED everyone knows about the previously furloughed. y question is When are the NW new hires ON PROBATION going to be made equal to the DL pilots ON PROBATION and prior as far as THEIR probation and longevity. There are blatant disparities there that will be resolved whenever the "transition team" decides to resolve them.
My point is if these are not resolved BEFORE an SLI is determined, it is not at all fair to these guys and new hires from NW will be lacking longevity that new hire DL guys hired AFTER them will have MORE of.

 

[Noserider76]

See this is the SAME bypass of the issues I am talking about that haven't been answered....

re: DOBirth: Most DL pilots except post 9-11 I believe are by Date of BIRTH within their classes. All of NW I believe are Date of birth within their class. Are they planning to make this small group at DL that has this off kilter rule equal?

re: longevity.,, AS I STATED everyone knows about the previously furloughed. y question is When are the NW new hires ON PROBATION going to be made equal to the DL pilots ON PROBATION and prior as far as THEIR probation and longevity. There are blatant disparities there that will be resolved whenever the "transition team" decides to resolve them.
My point is if these are not resolved BEFORE an SLI is determined, it is not at all fair to these guys and new hires from NW will be lacking longevity that new hire DL guys hired AFTER them will have MORE of.

The possible or perceived inequities of the past won't be a factor. How far would you go back? 1986? earlier? They were hired by the company they worked for and live with the contracts they signed. They have their relative seniority at their company and will take that to the SLI.

 

[Voice Of Reason]

The possible or perceived inequities of the past won't be a factor. How far would you go back? 1986? earlier? They were hired by the company they worked for and live with the contracts they signed. They have their relative seniority at their company and will take that to the SLI.

I'm pretty sure you aren't reading or comprehending my posts.
1) DL former furloughees retained longevity through their furloughs
2) NW former furloughees ARE NOW getting back (as they should) longevity from when they were on furlough
(above not the main point, just pre-info)
3) These same EQUALIZING measures MAY (OR MAY NOT) be applied in respect to the NW NEW HIRES' LONGEVITY (to make them equal citizens with the way longevity is calculated for DL New Hires)
4) If they are made equal "whenever the transition team decides to get to it," and not BEFORE AN SLI IS DETERMINED, there will be new hire NW guys that have less longevity than new hire DL guys hired AFTER them, just due to this glitch that hasn't been addressed on their behalf.
It's being left to a transition team that may implement it AFTER the SLI is done

 

[Noserider76]

I'm pretty sure you aren't reading or comprehending my posts.
1) DL former furloughees retained longevity through their furloughs
2) NW former furloughees ARE NOW getting back (as they should) longevity from when they were on furlough
(above not the main point, just pre-info)
3) These same EQUALIZING measures MAY (OR MAY NOT) be applied in respect to the NW NEW HIRES' LONGEVITY (to make them equal citizens with the way longevity is calculated for DL New Hires)
4) If they are made equal "whenever the transition team decides to get to it," and not BEFORE AN SLI IS DETERMINED, there will be new hire NW guys that have less longevity than new hire DL guys hired AFTER them, just due to this glitch that hasn't been addressed on their behalf.
It's being left to a transition team that may implement it AFTER the SLI is done

No, I fully understand what you're saying. It was NW pilots/management that signed the contract that didn't give them longevity. That's what they bring. Maybe they negotiated it away for the senior guys to keep their retirement, which all DL pilots lost, or some other contract provision. I don't know.

I told you a few posts ago: c: it's in arbitration

 

[clippyrip]

PER THE ARBITRATORS:

"The first, of course, is to create a list that recognizes the prevailing equities of the new relationship, some points on that, just a small digression. Numerous witnesses have alluded to the fact that this is a conglomeration of equals. You differ as to how equal, but I think Dr.Campbell was essentially correct in speaking of this being a merger and not some sort of an acquisition. I don't hear any serious argument from either side that one company is the savior of the other in this. And secondly, there is no doubt that you -- and I know that we -- will not cure the inequities, real or perceived, of the past, nor can we isolate or insulate anyone against the vagaries of the future. Talk about career expectations in this industry is a little like dreaming about income expectations and investment opportunities at a roulette table."

 

[AirportBum]

That would be great. Their SLI computer model showed 94 active DC9s, and had slots for 787s....also, let's get RA's opinion on how long the 742s will remain. If it is already in the business plan to get rid of them soon, that is important.


Bye Bye--General Lee

You love to keep bringing this point up. The only problem is while the statement is accurate, you're ignoring the context of the situation. Now that Anderson is making the decisions, we should all be affected by it. We're one happy family now right?

NWA didn't need this merger to survive, and wouldn't have dumped all their -200's or 9's (at least not without a replacement.) This merger has been in the works since way before it was officially announced, so it needs to be recognized that Delta management has had a hand in NWA's decision making (such as not ordering a -9 replacement) for a long time. We shouldn't get burned with a staple, because your (now our) management decided they don't want to replace the -9's at NWA pre-merger. And before you try to ignore it again, our scope prevents a full replacement of the -9's by Embraers.

Any reductions now (which will be made, and have been set in place by DAL management) should be shared seniority pain, ie no staple for either side.

I get what you're trying to do with your -9 and 742 propoganda (again probably accurate, but you conveniently ignore the surrounding circumstances.) However, it's detrimental to the longterm harmony of the pilot group.

Standing by for an incomplete, slanted response that doesn't really justify a staple. Oh yeah ->

 

[Noserider76]

PER THE ARBITRATORS:

And secondly, there is no doubt that you -- and I know that we -- will not cure the inequities, real or perceived, of the past, nor can we isolate or insulate anyone against the vagaries of the future.

You forgot to highlight the statement most relevant to this particular discussion.

 

[TWA Dude]

Every merger is different. No one integration scheme fits all. Merging by DOH may be easy and objective but my vote goes for fairness.

Funny how no pilot who stands to lose seniority through DOH speaks in favor of it.

 

[Voice Of Reason]

Y
NWA didn't need this merger to survive, and wouldn't have dumped all their -200's or 9's (at least not without a replacement.) This merger has been in the works since way before it was officially announced, so it needs to be recognized that Delta management has had a hand in NWA's decision making (such as not ordering a -9 replacement) for a long time. We shouldn't get burned with a staple, because your (now our) management decided they don't want to replace the -9's at NWA pre-merger. And before you try to ignore it again, our scope prevents a full replacement of the -9's by Embraers.

Any reductions now (which will be made, and have been set in place by DAL management) should be shared seniority pain, ie no staple for either side.

i

CANNOT BE EMPHASIZED ENOUGH....