NWA Retirements

[General Lee]

Lots of 'em.....you have read our closing arguments haven't you? If so, you would know exactly. Start reading around page 30....

That's one clip.....there are many more reasons given. Read.

Don't worry, we have an explanation in our closing brief which mirrors the truth:


However, against all odds, the NWA Committee pleads that the snapshot date
should be January 1, 2008, three-and-one-half months before the carriers agreed to merge
and ten months before the merger closed. As discussed above, there is nothing in prior
case law to support this extraordinary claim

NWA Committee seeks to have the Panel disregard happened long before the
merger closed and even prior to the April 14, 2008 merger agreement:
• NWA’s decision to reduce from thirteen to ten the number of B-747-200
freighters was announced to pilots no later than January 17, 2008. See
Memo to All Pilots from Tim Rainey, SVP – Flight Operations. DCX-7 at
1.
• Although NWA started the year with a fleet of 94 DC-9s, NWA pilots
were informed on April 3, 2008 by a memo from Mr. Rainey that the DC-
9 fleet would be reduced by the end of 2008 to just 58 aircraft. DCX-7 at
6.
• NWA began 2008 with a fleet of seventy-one B-757s. In Mr. Rainey’s
April 3rd memo, he informed NWA pilots that the fleet would be reduced
to 68. Then, in a follow-on memo dated June 27, 2008, Mr. Rainey
announced that the fleet of B-757s would be further reduced to 61. DCX-
7 at 10.
• NWA began 2008 with a fleet of 130 A-320/319s. In Mr. Rainey’s April
3rd memo, he informed NWA pilots that the fleet would be reduced to 126
aircraft.

Based on its wrong-headed assertion that January 1, 2008 is the
right snapshot date, the NWA Committee would have the Panel use the fleet as of that
date as the basis for calculating captain and FO entitlements for each aircraft type. This
assumption produces a fleet that does not reflect the significant acquisitions and
dispositions at each carrier between January 1st and the date of the merger. Specifically,
NWA would have the Panel assume that there are fifty aircraft in the NWA fleet that, in
fact, were no longer in the fleet, or were about to be gone from the fleet, on the date of
the merger:
• A DC-9 fleet of 94, versus the fleet of 58 DC-9s that NWA will actually have
at the end of the year;
• A B-747-200 fleet of 15, instead of 10;
• A B-757 fleet of 71, instead of 61; and
• An A-320/319 fleet of 130, instead of 126


Can you guys show me any exact numbers stating otherwise? I know Bastian stated "later rather than sooner" for some DC9s, which doesn't say much, and that "30 DC9s might come out of the desert" (actually a diversion for something else). I'd love to see it.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

December 8th cannot come soon enough!

You guys, go out and play a round of golf, kick the dog, or have a beer. Whatever it takes, you need to store your energy for the letdown EVERYONE is going to have on December 8th. There are going to be no windfalls for anyone. I think the arbitrators have made that painfully clear.

General,

Why do you flame the retired guys for taking their DB with them? It was theirs, they deserve it. I got zero, ziltch, nada for my DB and I have 8 years with this company. Those guys worked hard for their pensions and they deserve every penny. I think they are very grateful, albeit because of a federal mandate, that DAL is not contesting a full funding of their pensions.

Be good to eachother...

Windfalls for relative seniority? Like what USAir was given? Windfalls like DOH and Dynamic lists? Those are crazy, and not a part of the ALPA merger policy at all. (DOH was taken out in 1991) We have more retirements in the long run than NWA does, and this seniority list is FOREVER. It doesn't just count in the next 10 years like NALPA seems to think.

Hey, I think it is great that they left with their DB. We had a bunch of guys leave too with their lump sums (but we also lost all of our smaller 737s, MD11s, and 767-200s right after that too). The key here is that unlike the NWA guys who gave up their work rules and pay rates (which were just given back to them), our guys do not get that frozen pension. Yes, we did get a smaller cash payout (that was taxed if it was over the normal 401K allottment), but again that was forced on us. Overall, the NWA guys got to keep their pension, got back their pay and rules that they gave up, and still want MORE from us. They got a nice raise, but don't want to count it towards anything, still insisting that attrition is an equity, which has never been done before with an SLI. It's just ridiculous, but hey, they are GOING FOR IT. We'll see....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Superpilot92]

Blah Blah Blah, If your side says it then it MUST be true. If our side says it it MUST be true.

Again this is ALL extremely pointless. Redrum is dead on in his post.

Happy Holidays :beer:

 

[RedRum]

Hey, I think it is great that they left with their DB. We had a bunch of guys leave too with their lump sums (but we also lost all of our smaller 737s, MD11s, and 767-200s right after that too). The key here is that unlike the NWA guys who gave up their work rules and pay rates (which were just given back to them), our guys do not get that frozen pension. Yes, we did get a smaller cash payout (that was taxed if it was over the normal 401K allottment), but again that was forced on us. Overall, the NWA guys got to keep their pension, got back their pay and rules that they gave up, and still want MORE from us. They got a nice raise, but don't want to count it towards anything, still insisting that attrition is an equity, which has never been done before with an SLI. It's just ridiculous, but hey, they are GOING FOR IT. We'll see....


Bye Bye--General Lee

I see your point and I can understand your frustration.

However, where would you be right now, froma monetary standpoint, if your guys hadn't taken the lump sum and retired? Think about the extra cash you are making now on a widebody, not to mention the quality of life.

I am not being sarcastic. There is merit to all of our arguments. The arbitrators have a difficult job, but we are the ones that will have to pay for it.

Greed prevails no matter what side we are on. There is a lot of it to go around. It will be there when WE retire...WHY? Because of the way us young guns were treated when the perverbial s$$t hit the fan. Too bad.

 

[General Lee]

I see your point and I can understand your frustration.

However, where would you be right now, froma monetary standpoint, if your guys hadn't taken the lump sum and retired? Think about the extra cash you are making now on a widebody, not to mention the quality of life.

I am not being sarcastic. There is merit to all of our arguments. The arbitrators have a difficult job, but we are the ones that will have to pay for it.

Greed prevails no matter what side we are on. There is a lot of it to go around. It will be there when WE retire...WHY? Because of the way us young guns were treated when the perverbial s$$t hit the fan. Too bad.

Hey, it is nice that you are being nice, and I am not trying to be mean here. I like to debate, and I see a lot of reason for it here. A lot of your NALPA stuff is in left field, and a lot of what they are asking for shows entitlement problems, since we have been more forthcoming in trying to bridge the gap. Retirements are on both sides, which NALPA refuses to look at, and the seniority list is forever. Your dynamic list (which is crazy) doesn't account for our retirements at all, and it is obvious. DOH hasn't been used forever, and it is out of our ALPA merger policy, and we are both members of that. (out since 1991) Your side sure does look like the USAir East position. We will see how it goes.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[DTW320]

Don't worry, we have an explanation in our closing brief which mirrors the truth:


However, against all odds, the NWA Committee pleads that the snapshot date
should be January 1, 2008, three-and-one-half months before the carriers agreed to merge
and ten months before the merger closed. As discussed above, there is nothing in prior
case law to support this extraordinary claim

NWA Committee seeks to have the Panel disregard happened long before the
merger closed and even prior to the April 14, 2008 merger agreement:
• NWA’s decision to reduce from thirteen to ten the number of B-747-200
freighters was announced to pilots no later than January 17, 2008. See
Memo to All Pilots from Tim Rainey, SVP – Flight Operations. DCX-7 at
1.
• Although NWA started the year with a fleet of 94 DC-9s, NWA pilots
were informed on April 3, 2008 by a memo from Mr. Rainey that the DC-
9 fleet would be reduced by the end of 2008 to just 58 aircraft. DCX-7 at
6.
• NWA began 2008 with a fleet of seventy-one B-757s. In Mr. Rainey’s
April 3rd memo, he informed NWA pilots that the fleet would be reduced
to 68. Then, in a follow-on memo dated June 27, 2008, Mr. Rainey
announced that the fleet of B-757s would be further reduced to 61. DCX-
7 at 10.
• NWA began 2008 with a fleet of 130 A-320/319s. In Mr. Rainey’s April
3rd memo, he informed NWA pilots that the fleet would be reduced to 126
aircraft.

Based on its wrong-headed assertion that January 1, 2008 is the
right snapshot date, the NWA Committee would have the Panel use the fleet as of that
date as the basis for calculating captain and FO entitlements for each aircraft type. This
assumption produces a fleet that does not reflect the significant acquisitions and
dispositions at each carrier between January 1st and the date of the merger. Specifically,
NWA would have the Panel assume that there are fifty aircraft in the NWA fleet that, in
fact, were no longer in the fleet, or were about to be gone from the fleet, on the date of
the merger:
• A DC-9 fleet of 94, versus the fleet of 58 DC-9s that NWA will actually have
at the end of the year;
• A B-747-200 fleet of 15, instead of 10;
• A B-757 fleet of 71, instead of 61; and
• An A-320/319 fleet of 130, instead of 126


Can you guys show me any exact numbers stating otherwise? I know Bastian stated "later rather than sooner" for some DC9s, which doesn't say much, and that "30 DC9s might come out of the desert" (actually a diversion for something else). I'd love to see it.


Bye Bye--General Lee

Your side's entire argument hinges on timing. You want to use what we brought to the merger but also want to assume that neither company even thought of merging prior to the public announcement and made plans as a stand alone right up until the minute of the press release. THAT's Hilarious as well as hugely naive. You can't have it both ways General. If you insist on looking at what NWA did with fleet plans well after the merger announcement (your "snapshot" date) then let's also throw out hourly rates prior to the JPWA TA. You guys want to have your cake and eat it too.....and that's just not going to happen. Nope. Also, please post ALPA merger policy that prohibits DOH from being used. Just because it doesn't require it doesn't mean it can't be considered or used by the panel, as was clearly shown in our briefs/testimony.

 

[DTW320]

Your dynamic list (which is crazy) doesn't account for our retirements at all, and it is obvious. DOH hasn't been used forever, and it is out of our ALPA merger policy, and we are both members of that. (out since 1991) Your side sure does look like the USAir East position. We will see how it goes.

Our dynamic list doesn't cost a DAL pilot any seniority, now or ever. It just prevents him/her from migrating to a 4+:1 ratio, DAL to NWA in a few years. That was clearly shown. A windfall by any measure. Again,(and again) USAir's DOH position was very different than ours as specified in the conditions and restrictions contained in our proposal. It's like saying that a flight from DTW to YYZ is international in the same way that LAX to NRT or NRT to MNL is.

 

[RedRum]

Agree to Disagree

Windfalls for relative seniority? Like what USAir was given? Windfalls like DOH and Dynamic lists? Those are crazy, and not a part of the ALPA merger policy at all. (DOH was taken out in 1991) We have more retirements in the long run than NWA does, and this seniority list is FOREVER. It doesn't just count in the next 10 years like NALPA seems to think.

Hey, I think it is great that they left with their DB. We had a bunch of guys leave too with their lump sums (but we also lost all of our smaller 737s, MD11s, and 767-200s right after that too). The key here is that unlike the NWA guys who gave up their work rules and pay rates (which were just given back to them), our guys do not get that frozen pension. Yes, we did get a smaller cash payout (that was taxed if it was over the normal 401K allottment), but again that was forced on us. Overall, the NWA guys got to keep their pension, got back their pay and rules that they gave up, and still want MORE from us. They got a nice raise, but don't want to count it towards anything, still insisting that attrition is an equity, which has never been done before with an SLI. It's just ridiculous, but hey, they are GOING FOR IT. We'll see....


Bye Bye--General Lee

There's the crux of the matter.

I think DALPA was the one that made 1 proposal ad stuck with it throughout the entire arbotration hearings. We introduced 2 different proposals. From our standpoint you didn't budge, but I digress.

We will see how it turns out. We will all have to figure out a way to "get along." I don't want anything that compares to what NWA management did to fragment one sect against another. Life is too short.

 

[FDJ2]

I see your point and I can understand your frustration.

However, where would you be right now, froma monetary standpoint, if your guys hadn't taken the lump sum and retired? Think about the extra cash you are making now on a widebody, not to mention the quality of life.

RedRum, he'd be about where he is right now.

Here's a little quote that should explain:

"In the three years before we faced liquidity shortfall (10/1/2002 – 10/1/2005) we had about 2,200 pilots retire.

About 1,450 of those pilots would have retired by December 2007 (when the FAA retirement age changed).

Of those 750 left, about 250 were on long term disability.

Of the 450 left, 100 would not be in the top 33% of our list today.

Therefore, you are talking about 350 pilots that early retired that held active flying positions and would be in the top 33% on our list. A significant number but not the “thousands” that the Northwest pilots expect.

Note: Of the remaining 350 pilots some would have been lost to attrition so the actual number would even be a bit smaller."

Also consider that if our pension had survived more Delta pilots would have retired with their lump sum since the pension stopped paying lump sums in 2005. So it is quite possible that General Lee and other Delta pilots would have been further up the seniority list then where they find themselves today.

Regardless, you are not merging with Delta's 2002 seniority list, but rather with Delta's 2008 list.

 

[General Lee]

Your side's entire argument hinges on timing. You want to use what we brought to the merger but also want to assume that neither company even thought of merging prior to the public announcement and made plans as a stand alone right up until the minute of the press release. THAT's Hilarious as well as hugely naive. You can't have it both ways General. If you insist on looking at what NWA did with fleet plans well after the merger announcement (your "snapshot" date) then let's also throw out hourly rates prior to the JPWA TA. You guys want to have your cake and eat it too.....and that's just not going to happen. Nope. Also, please post ALPA merger policy that prohibits DOH from being used. Just because it doesn't require it doesn't mean it can't be considered or used by the panel, as was clearly shown in our briefs/testimony.

I guess STAPLE could also be used too, but we for some reason decided against that, since it was about as dumb as DOH. Ask the USAir East guys how that went. Hey, ask your lawyer, he represented them.

You guys want to throw the earliest date on there (Jan 1st) because that is when you still had most of your airplanes on the books, and after that a lot of them were announced to go away. We ALL CAN UNDERSTAND why you would want to do it, especially since the merger announcement was 3 months later.

Were our hourly rates the same in Jan as they were in July? Sure they were. We brought YOUR RATES UP TO OURS. There is nothing you can say about that. You benefited a great deal as pilots, whereas as a company we benefit getting a NRT hub. Your income immediately rose at the DCC, remember that? We got a perdiem raise (along with you). Oh wait, you DESERVED that pay raise, along with DOH and a Dynamic list. Talk about Hillarious. And, you pointed out that your overall list made more money on average via ALPA dues. Fins was correct in saying we had 600 newhires that year, with no dues during their first year. How about this year? We were expanding, and you were hiring for attrition.

You can assume that Steenland and RA were "talking" prior to the merger, but during the first attempt it was broken off at the last minute due to a dispute between RA and Steenland on who would receive which title while running the company. Do you remember that? I am surprised that you guys didn't try to get the snapshot during the 1st merger attempt too. What if they had had another argument during this last time too? Could it have been scrapped again? Haven't you heard of the saying "I won't believe the plane is here until it is on our ramp." Nothing is final until the paperwork is signed, and in reality we should have made the snapshot at the DCC, but instead we decided to give in "again" to you and go for July. Man alive, we sure are nice to you guys. I can't wait until I can go into our MSP crew lounge, stop in the entrance, announce in the deepest voice I can, "Hey guys, thanks for your SLI proposal.....You guys are NUMBER ONE!! (and use a finger to show the number 1)" (although I think our guy will actually be number 1 in seniority)It will be fantastic. Other than all of that, welcome aboard!

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FBN0223]

Met a new-hire '07 Delta pilot yesterday at LAX. His quote, "Last year I was at Pinnacle, now I am going to be senior to NWA '99 hires."

Just a little quote to remind us how the DAL proposal is a fricking absurd, unrealistic and greedy proposal. Hey, DALPA, YOU ARE NUMBER ONE(insert Bird here)!!!!

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

That doesn't sound right, FBN. I think myself and one of my classmates were the only former 9E people proposed to be integrated in with 99 hires...and I haven't been anywhere close to LAX for months, and I know the other one hasn't either.

Calling BS on that one.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Well I was just after Peanuckle and I was slotted in with late 99 hires as well.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Yeah, the next guy hired from 9e was in class in August or so... hence my suspision.

 

[FBN0223]

Yeah, the next guy hired from 9e was in class in August or so... hence my suspision.

Well the guy said he worked for Pinnacle. In any case, if you go to the DAL proposed list you will see 2007 Delta Newbies placed in front of NWA 1999 nine-year seasoned pilots. To hear Delta guys defend this and their proposal is truly comical.

Reminds me of that Rodney Dangerfield movie where the professor asks, "And where shall we place our factory?"
Rodney, "How about Fantasyland!!!"

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

I personally don't think I'll be integrated in with 99 newhires. Ratio-wise (and current bidding power) it makes sense, but it would ruffle too many feathers.

 

[General Lee]

I personally don't think I'll be integrated in with 99 newhires. Ratio-wise (and current bidding power) it makes sense, but it would ruffle too many feathers.

AWA newhires were integrated with 1990 hires at USAir, and Nicelau thought that was fair. Did Greenbooks think what they were given was fair? Redbooks don't care what other people think.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Met a new-hire '07 Delta pilot yesterday at LAX. His quote, "Last year I was at Pinnacle, now I am going to be senior to NWA '99 hires."

Just a little quote to remind us how the DAL proposal is a fricking absurd, unrealistic and greedy proposal. Hey, DALPA, YOU ARE NUMBER ONE(insert Bird here)!!!!

USAir East guys thought the same, but relative seniority is the way to go---nobody moves from current position in the company. If your company stayed stagnate (no expansion), and the other company hired for expansion, there is NO reason to penalize the expanding company's pilots. Nope. Nicelau didn't think so.

And, if you are going to use my quote about being number 1, you need to pay me royalties.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[ACL65PILOT]

True, and there will be no chance for a negotiated list. We will wait and see what our arbitrators come up with. Love it or hate it, we will get to life with it.

I agree, that I hold the same bidding power as the NWA brethren I was slotted in with. If it were a straight ratio, I would loose about 300 to 400 slots. About one category of equipment.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Hate to say it but neither of us are hiring, and that was done for a reason.

 

[General Lee]

True, and there will be no chance for a negotiated list. We will wait and see what our arbitrators come up with. Love it or hate it, we will get to life with it.

I agree, that I hold the same bidding power as the NWA brethren I was slotted in with. If it were a straight ratio, I would loose about 300 to 400 slots. About one category of equipment.

Straight ratio? We bring more widebodies (like USAir did with their A330s), higher paying jobs (they bring more DC9s with their lower pay), and they already got a nice raise they don't like to talk about. They are bringing a NRT hub, some nice widebodies (some are going away sooner than later too), and some other hubs that we don't have......A slotted ratio by aircraft size and pay should be sufficent to keep people in the status quo, along with a certain amount at the bottom due to carreer expectations as a stand alone pre merger.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[michael707767]

Met a new-hire '07 Delta pilot yesterday at LAX. His quote, "Last year I was at Pinnacle, now I am going to be senior to NWA '99 hires."

So some Delta pilot just came up to you and spit out that quote? I think you are full of sh*t.

 

[FBN0223]

He was in the my jumpseat, moron. You want his name and employee number?

 

[DTW320]

I guess STAPLE could also be used too, but we for some reason decided against that, since it was about as dumb as DOH.True to form you are avoiding the issue: that DOH does not violate any ALPA merger policy. THAT was the issue, not some line pilot's opinion of whose proposal is "dumb".. Here's the timeline: YOU raised the issue, I showed that you were wrong, YOU ignored and/or changed the issue to deflect...I can set my watch by it...you do it EVERY time! Ask the USAir East guys how that went. Hey, ask your lawyer, he represented them. As I stated and you ignored, NWA's DOH proposal with C & R's is very diferent than USAir's....it just makes you feel better to ignore that FACT. You've got nothin on an ostrich there Private..

You guys want to throw the earliest date on there (Jan 1st) because that is when you still had most of your airplanes on the books, and after that a lot of them were announced to go away. We ALL CAN UNDERSTAND why you would want to do it, especially since the merger announcement was 3 months later. No, as was exhaustively delineated in our closing statement, it is because the merger planning at the executive level was well underway by then and fleet plans were being influenced. I'll give DALPA credit for being able to keep a straight face when saying that July 2008 reflects the stand alone (you know....what was brought to the merger) NWA plans.

Were our hourly rates the same in Jan as they were in July? Sure they were. We brought YOUR RATES UP TO OURS. Sorry, that's wrong. As was CLEARLY explained we were brought up to LOA 19 rates by DAL, not DALPA. Why did DALPA get LOA19 rates? Because Richard R E A L L Y wanted to merge with NWA and they had to grease the DALPA palm.There is nothing you can say about that. Golly Private.....I think I just did!

You can assume that Steenland and RA were "talking" prior to the merger, and you in your delusional business state of mind, apparently, can assume that NWA was making stand alone plans right up to DCC....but during the first attempt it was broken off at the last minute due to a dispute between RA and Steenland on who would receive which title while running the company. Total BS....trust me, keep flying airplanes, you are WAY to naive to venture into any executive position at a Fortune 100 company.Do you remember that? I am surprised that you guys didn't try to get the snapshot during the 1st merger attempt too. What if they had had another argument during this last time too? Could it have been scrapped again? Haven't you heard of the saying "I won't believe the plane is here until it is on our ramp." Nothing is final until the paperwork is signed, and in reality we should have made the snapshot at the DCC, but instead we decided to give in "again" to you and go for July. Man alive, we sure are nice to you guys. I can't wait until I can go into our MSP crew lounge, stop in the entrance, announce in the deepest voice I can, "Hey guys, thanks for your SLI proposal.....You guys are NUMBER ONE!! (and use a finger to show the number 1)" (although I think our guy will actually be number 1 in seniority)It will be fantastic. Other than all of that, welcome aboard! Let me know if you need directions. Since you'll likely be based there when this is over you'll be flipping off a LOT of RD's. You know, like they do to you right now...

Bye Bye--General Lee

You're really starting to reach on this stuff....just take a deep breath and R E L A X. Don't screw up your impending windfall by going out on medical (although if you do, you'll STILL be on the seniority list)

 

[michael707767]

He was in the my jumpseat, moron. You want his name and employee number?

Yeah, give it to me in a private message. I'll check it out. But I don't believe he was just sitting on your jumpseat and blurted out that exact statement.

 

[Fly4hire]

. Love it or hate it, we will get to life with it.

Prediction: NWA will lick their wounds and deal with whatever it is. DALPA will sue, appeal, etc, etc. much worse than what they have accused the Red/Green folks of if they don't get their expectations met.

I agree, that I hold the same bidding power as the NWA brethren I was slotted in with. If it were a straight ratio, I would loose about 300 to 400 slots. About one category of equipment.

Except you won't lose anything because there will be no bump or flush. Worse case is you might be where you are for a while.

 

[FBN0223]

Yeah, give it to me in a private message. I'll check it out. But I don't believe he was just sitting on your jumpseat and blurted out that exact statement.

I probably won't do that since I don't know who YOU are. Truth is, I liked the guy. Seemed like a straight shooter. The SLI came up in conversation and he mentioned that last year he was at Pinnacle and the Delta proposed SLI had him senior to NWA '99 hires. Look at the Delta SLI, he is correct.

 

[Truckdriver]

In any case, if you go to the DAL proposed list you will see 2007 Delta Newbies placed in front of NWA 1999 nine-year seasoned pilots.

We don't get seasoned at Delta until 10 years so I guess that wouldn't be fair. I wish we could have moved up our seasoning to year 9 like you guys have. That would have been great!

 

[General Lee]

.True to form you are avoiding the issue: that DOH does not violate any ALPA merger policy. THAT was the issue, not some line pilot's opinion of whose proposal is "dumb".. Here's the timeline: YOU raised the issue, I showed that you were wrong, YOU ignored and/or changed the issue to deflect...I can set my watch by it...you do it EVERY time! Great DOH can be used, but ALPA decided NOT to use it officially since 1991. Why do we have a merger policy? Is NALPA not a part of ALPA? How did USAIr East do? Same as you will do.


As I stated and you ignored, NWA's DOH proposal with C & R's is very diferent than USAir's....it just makes you feel better to ignore that FACT. You've got nothin on an ostrich there Private.. Talk about Ridiculous. Everything about your proposal with C&Rs was flawed to begin with, and the transcripts showed it. But hey, your "super premium" flying remark made people laugh..

No, as was exhaustively delineated in our closing statement, it is because the merger planning at the executive level was well underway by then and fleet plans were being influenced. I'll give DALPA credit for being able to keep a straight face when saying that July 2008 reflects the stand alone (you know....what was brought to the merger) NWA plans. Do you have ANY documentation showing that RA was in direct talks telling Steenland what to do prior to the Merger announcement? I bet you do not, but you think you do. What would RA or Steenland say? What about the first merger attempt? Why don't you use that date then? Just because they scrapped it at the last minute, shouldn't disuade you........You lost on that one.. until the merger announcement is MADE, it can be scrapped at anytime. Go watch Kramer and learn something.

Sorry, that's wrong. As was CLEARLY explained we were brought up to LOA 19 rates by DAL, not DALPA. Why did DALPA get LOA19 rates? Because Richard R E A L L Y wanted to merge with NWA and they had to grease the DALPA palm. Huh? We have had higher rates than you have for a few years now. The LOA19 rates allow us to get a raise on Jan 1st. We brought your rates up to our CURRENT rates, and then you will get the 5% raise along with us in Jan. Why is this so hard for you to understand? You need to unthaw your brain with Type 4. And we could have done LOA 19 with you earlier, but Stevens had to go to Mexico....

Golly Private.....I think I just did! Wrong, I might add, again.

, and you in your delusional business state of mind, apparently, can assume that NWA was making stand alone plans right up to DCC.... It could have been. This was the SECOND of the two merger attempts. Did you know about the first one? I guess not. How did it get scuttled again? Sorry, but again you are wrong, no direct talks until the merger is announced, and Jan 1st for you guys is way off. I bet RA and Steenland were thinking about it, though. Yeah, and RA is probably thinking about Alaska and Jetblue now too, so make sure you call those guys and give them a date to mark on their future arbitration hearings too.....

Total BS....trust me, keep flying airplanes, you are WAY to naive to venture into any executive position at a Fortune 100 company. Total BS? You don't know that. I can give you articles describing it, but of course you KNOW they are lying. Whatever, you have no proof. Steenland wanted to stay around for the money train, and he used to work FOR RA, and RA didn't want him at the Chairman of the Board position. RA said no, and Steenland gave up after thinking he may lose a lot of money. Sorry, that is how it happened. RA didn't want to work for a guy who used to work for him.

Let me know if you need directions. Since you'll likely be based there when this is over you'll be flipping off a LOT of RD's. You know, like they do to you right now... Just remember, wear your hat in ATL, and don't wear the Fonzi jacket. And, a MSP captain position won't be bad for me, the 757 flights out of there seem alright. Can't wait, and I will immediately come in to the lounge and say out loud, "Hey Hosers, did you see the gophers last night? They are A-Boat the best College football team in Minnesota, eh?"


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FDJ2]

Except you won't lose anything because there will be no bump or flush. Worse case is you might be where you are for a while.

By that same logic, you wouldn't lose anything if you were stapled to the bottom of the list with no bump and no flush. You might be where you are for awhile, but hey, no biggie.