The logic of relative seniority

[Max Powers]

LOL...you are hilarious! I almost feel bad laughing, because I was raised better than to laugh at slow kids.

PW

PS What color is the sky in your world?

Get over it dude some guys are going to be put in front of you. That is the new color to your sky.

 

[Flopgut]

This thread is quite a brawl..... I should stay out of it, but I'm interested to know what somebody like St. Nic thinks about longevity vs. DOH? Suppose you have a currently furloughed pilot, who got furloughed 1 year after being hired, that you have to intergrate with a pilot hired at a much later date that is not only still working but has 5 times the longevity? Or is currently furloughed with multiple more years longevity that the pilot with the earlier DOH?

 

[maru657]

Just look at the MESA/West pilots based in Phoenix! There is one unargueable fact that is uniform across all airlined: DATE OF HIRE! Southwest wouldn't have anything to worry about if they merged with USAPA because what each side brought to the merger, seniority, would be perserved.

Wow, This just requires comment. If D.O.H. were a standard anymore then Mckaskill-Bond would not have been revisited. SouthWest would have brought the Morris pilots in house D.O.H, American and Reno along with TWA, Ditto. Not saying it was ever a bad idea, just one that was ignored for so many years.

 

[St. Nic]

I see that it was my post you deleted in response to st. nic. The word "scumbag," I used was the only one I thought would get past the censor, yet get my point across about pukes like him!
He continues to bring east/west diatribe with his latest response calling west pilots mesa west. So you ban 400Adude for 30 days, good on ya. Can't stand him. How about throwing the rest of us a bone and banning st. nic for for 30 days or better yet, permamently, for his continuing to bring us air east/west BS into every stinking thread?
You obviously don't have any problem banning people, myself included.
So....How about it?

Maybe you should leave it all alone with your personel attacks! I have always supported date of hire and will never understand how a guy hired 5 months ago is justified being place above a guy hired 17 years ago!!! Insanity! Relative seniority is an oximoron

 

[Lear70]

No, I don't have a problem with suspending people who can't follow the rules, but it's not something I *LIKE* to do. I give warnings again and again, and finally only ban someone when they show deliberate intent to disregard the rules after being repeatedly warned.

I've put several people in hoc for 30 days lately, and I'm about to start giving people some longer time off, 90+ days, even a permanent ban for one person who's been suspended 4 times for varying lengths of time, if they don't knock it off.

As far as THIS thread is concerned, given that this isn't a thread about one airline or another, but rather arguing a specific issue, "Relative Seniority", allowing discussion about ANY airline's SLI is certainly fair game, including UAir/AWA, AA/TWA, UAL/CAL, or the upcoming SWA/AAI.

I'm not here to stifle free discussion, I simply attempt to keep it on track, in accordance with the ToS, and not let other threads be infiltrated by discussion that their topic isn't about when it becomes viral, like the AWA/UAir debacle did a while back. However, slinging mud at each other isn't going to be allowed, either. You can disagree to your heart's content, just don't get personal or profane. A good rule of thumb: if you wouldn't say it to someone's face in a crowded crew room, probably not a good idea to say it here.

/mod

 

[Lear70]

Maybe you should leave it all alone with your personel attacks! I have always supported date of hire and will never understand how a guy hired 5 months ago is justified being place above a guy hired 17 years ago!!! Insanity! Relative seniority is an oximoron

Moderator hat off:

Speaking in general terms, the problem I have with pure DOH is that, in a company who hasn't hired in 5 years, compared with a company who has hired constantly for the last 5 years, doubling in size, with DOH, you'd effectively staple half the seniority list to the bottom of the airline. If they're both profitable airlines, that just won't fly, no pun intended.

With that scenario, you take a pilot who was bidding in the top 10% of their F/O's seat, getting ready to upgrade in the next 6-12 months, and throw them on the BACK end of a seniority list, tell them they're not going to upgrade for a decade, if they're LUCKY, and they just lost their Quality of Life, too?

Sorry, I don't think that's fair. There HAS to be some middle ground. Every scenario is going to be different. To tell everyone that "Relative Seniority is the only way to go because it's the only thing that's fair" is certainly NOT going to fit some scenarios, just as Date of Hire isn't going to be fair for others.

A blended use of Relative Seniority plus Date of Hire plus some kind of ratio that attempts to preserve seats, upgrade expectations, and bidding position for Quality of Life seems to be the way most of these should go to avoid angst. However, no matter what, someone's always going to be ****** off. History has certainly taught us that.

The less preconceived expectations we have going in, the better off we'll all likely be. Just my .02 cents.

 

[Fubijaakr]

DoH is a non-starter. You have to recognize the seniority of SWA pilots who were on the property prior to the first date Air Tran/Valujet turned a wheel. Additionally, you need to recognize the seniority of the Air Tran pilots.

That's why I maintain the only fair way to integrate the seniority list is to place the SWA pilots hired prior to 1992 on the Seniority list first. Then ratio the rest of the pilots. Simple, fair, period.

 

[Cometman]

DoH is a non-starter. You have to recognize the seniority of SWA pilots who were on the property prior to the first date Air Tran/Valujet turned a wheel. Additionally, you need to recognize the seniority of the Air Tran pilots.

That's why I maintain the only fair way to integrate the seniority list is to place the SWA pilots hired prior to 1992 on the Seniority list first. Then ratio the rest of the pilots. Simple, fair, period.

Would that not be DOH then. If AAI started in 1993 then the top pilot would have a DOH of 1993. He would then start the ratio and he would be below all the SWA 1992 guys. Am I correct in that assumption?

 

[Scope out RJ's]

Maybe you should leave it all alone with your personel attacks! I have always supported date of hire and will never understand how a guy hired 5 months ago is justified being place above a guy hired 17 years ago!!! Insanity! Relative seniority is an oximoron

Insaity is not living by binding arbitration. Something the east failed to do. Insanity is thinking anything after 20 years and 2 furloughs and still only able to hold e190 f/o, making mesa type wages. Insanity is screwing over the pilots who saved your job.
Insanity is continuing to let us air operate. It should have died when America West purchased you!

 

[MCDU]

Moderator hat off:

Speaking in general terms, the problem I have with pure DOH is that, in a company who hasn't hired in 5 years, compared with a company who has hired constantly for the last 5 years, doubling in size, with DOH, you'd effectively staple half the seniority list to the bottom of the airline. If they're both profitable airlines, that just won't fly, no pun intended.

.

The reason that usually happens is when one pilot group does the work for cheaper. Stagnation happens to all airlines. The higher the pay, the more you stagnant. Low pay=lots of movement.

It is very cyclical. Just look at AMR or United or UPS. DOH is fair. It is greed that drives the notion that someone with less years deserves more. Just like D in an RJ wants USAIR to die. Pure greed so other pilots could move ahead, all the while pilots with 25 years lose their Jobs to the PFT generation. Reminds me of Republic and Midwest.

A windfall explained

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN5B9tKaB8I&NR=1

M