The logic of relative seniority

[GuppyWN]

Guys....... seriously.

Why are we having these discussions?

Do you honestly think you/we/us are gaining anything by stating your case on FI?

Let's leave it to the unions and/or the arbitrator.

Gup

 

[AFcitrus]

Guys....... seriously.

Why are we having these discussions?

Do you honestly think you/we/us are gaining anything by stating your case on FI?

Let's leave it to the unions and/or the arbitrator.

Gup

I second that!

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

I second that!

I thought you would. I will too...

 

[dicko]

You mean probable, as AT now has a second payscale for 717, right?

No ..... AirTran has a single payrate for both the 737-700 and the 717.

In the current long suffering contract the 737-800 pays 13% more.

 

[kc81900]

The Airtran pilot group is almost as productive. We have to suffer with inefficient scheduling which prevents us from being more productive. We have a management team that treats us with disdain, schedulers who go out of their way to screw you over, gate agents with atlantatude and an overall work atmosphere that can challenge the most upbeat person. We still make it happen on a daily basis. We have been screwed over by managment and by past union leadership. This pilot group will have enormous success working within the culture of Southwest Airlines. As the integration goes you will find a motivated working group that will be an asset and not a liability.

Why oh why did we buy this????

 

[Cometman]

I second that!

I asked you this question yesterday but you have not answered it. Since you seem to be the most knowlegeable one can you answer this: Or if anybody else knows. Maybe the General knows. He seems to know everything.

I would assume that both sides have to get a transition agreement with their respective company before they start on the SLI. At what point do the both sides agree if it will be handled by 1 arbritraitor or a panel of 3? Is that a choice they have ? If so, if they disagree does it go to arbitration? It seems like it can be a never ending task.

Thanks

 

[madjack]

Cometman,

I do not know the answer to your questions...my best guess is that after a period of time/period of negotiating it will become clear to ALPA/SWAPA that a SLI agreement is forthcoming or not...at which point a negotiated agreement will be voted on by the respective memberships at SWA and AAI. If a stalemate develops (at the negotiating level or from a vote) the issue goes to arbitration. A single arbitrator decides the outcome...
It is being argued that Relative Seniority is the precedent that an arbitrator will use in making his decision. If this indeed is the outcome, than the AAI pilots will reap an unprecedented windfall...BUT, there will be unintened consequences after the AAI pilots finish climbing over the shoulders of their soon to be SWAPA brethren.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

So do you think that SWA FOs should take the AT captain's seats and the AT captains should be downgraded to FOs?

If those AT captains would rather not commute and be based in PHX or LAS (ect.) and the SWA FO is willing to go to ATL, perhaps yes. If AT's are content to stay in ATL or SWA doesn't want to go there, then nope.

That same type thing has been playing out with NWA/DL and will soon be with the Pinnacle/Colgan/Mesaba integration. If you are wondering what will happen these are places to look to get a general idea. It isn't going to be a mirror of either as these aren't exactly the same situation but it will be similar.

 

[Cometman]

Cometman,

I do not know the answer to your questions...my best guess is that after a period of time/period of negotiating it will become clear to ALPA/SWAPA that a SLI agreement is forthcoming or not...at which point a negotiated agreement will be voted on by the respective memberships at SWA and AAI. If a stalemate develops (at the negotiating level or from a vote) the issue goes to arbitration. A single arbitrator decides the outcome...
It is being argued that Relative Seniority is the precedent that an arbitrator will use in making his decision. If this indeed is the outcome, than the AAI pilots will reap an unprecedented windfall...BUT, there will be unintened consequences after the AAI pilots finish climbing over the shoulders of their soon to be SWAPA brethren.

Thanks for the response. I thought I read that the Delta/Northwest merger had a panel of 3. Is that true? If so there must be an option to be decided by SWA/Airtran. Another thing I thought I read, I would have to recheck it though, the AAA (American Arbritration Association)said it can be done with either 3 or 1. Anybody else have information on this. Where are all the experts like the General. Maybe they are not really an expert?

 

[doh]

When people propose a SLI that is based on a straight relative seniority they are effectively proposing that all airline pilot jobs flying similar equipment are the same. Therefore the first pilot hired at Virgin America flying the A-320 series can say he has the same quality job as the #1 A-320 pilot at Delta. Because they fly the same equipment this must be true. Using this logic any other factors relating to the quality of employment are not considered. It doesn’t matter that the Delta pilot makes considerably more money that the VA pilot, or that the work rules are much more favorable, retirement is better, or even the much more stable nature of the job at Delta. In non-industry terms, a county court judge and a Supreme Court justice are really the same because they are both judges.

In addition to the stated relative seniority fairness benchmark, under this logic a Captain seat is sacred and must be preserved. It makes no difference if a CA at Airline A makes less that an FO at airline B. Using this logic, the ultimate goal of any pilot is not to make the most money for the least work
days, but is to have a fourth stripe on his shirt. Therefore any pilot entering the profession should go to the airline that will get his that stripe as early as possible. Work conditions and pay are irrelevant. A CA at a regional has a better job than an FO at a major, by nature of the fact that he is a CA. A UPS 747 CA has the same job as a Kalitta 747 CA. Using this logic, pay is not a consideration only seat position. In non-industry terms, the CEO of “Bill and Ted’s excellent hot dog stand” is really the same and should be paid the same as the CEO of General Electric because they are both CEOs.

Is this really what the relative seniority people think is “fair and equitable”? I
am not and will not propose a particular SLI. Posters have repeatedly stated that relative seniority is the only “fair” way to do an SLI, and I am questioning the logic behind this. Fire away, but please use your mind and don’t try to pick on the specific examples I used. They are intended to be generic in order to tease out the logic behind the assertion.

Can you sell it to the arbitrator? That's really the only question that has to be answered.