The logic of relative seniority

[Secret Squirrel]

Define "cool with it". I have no say in the fact that my company decided to merge. I have no say in what the arbitrator will decide for SLI. I can only control the things that I can control.

None of this is personal. I go to work, I try not to puke when the captain is talking about some old bag FA that he is banging, take home any bed bugs, catch food poisoning at the airport, but I do try to get home and spend as much time with my wife and kids. A lot of these posts make it sound so us against them. In this case we have very little control over what happens.

The choice we have is to move on or to hold on to the past. All this bickering is just mental masturbation and is going to polarize the pilot groups. Why do you guys keep engaging each other? Does either side seriously believe you are going to change each others minds or devise the winning argument before the arbitrator?

But then again this is Flight Info where the whole goal is to show everybody how smart we are, mock and belittle, or stir ******************** up.

Good luck to all. I look forward to racing you to the runway in BWI.

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Maybe AA will buy SW and bump
Every Captain who has been there
Less than 20 years back to the right
Seat.

Maybe then the SW guys would have
A better grasp of "reality""

If Swa was being integrated on to the American list, I would not expect any one not senior enough on the new list to hold CA to "keep their seat". Possibly pay protection.

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Define "cool with it". I have no say in the fact that my company decided to merge. I have no say in what the arbitrator will decide for SLI. I can only control the things that I can control.

None of this is personal. I go to work, I try not to puke when the captain is talking about some old bag FA that he is banging, take home any bed bugs, catch food poisoning at the airport, but I do try to get home and spend as much time with my wife and kids. A lot of these posts make it sound so us against them. In this case we have very little control over what happens.

The choice we have is to move on or to hold on to the past. All this bickering is just mental masturbation and is going to polarize the pilot groups. Why do you guys keep engaging each other? Does either side seriously believe you are going to change each others minds or devise the winning argument before the arbitrator?

But then again this is Flight Info where the whole goal is to show everybody how smart we are, mock and belittle, or stir ******************** up.

Good luck to all. I look forward to racing you to the runway in BWI.

Cool with it means the hypothetical situation seems fair to you. You'd be ok with an 08 hire Virgin CA being senior to an 04 hire AT FO. You'd be ok with 07 hire Va capt senior to 93 hire AT Capt.

I take it that this is how Ty and Af feel. If so, that's fine and we'll agree to disagree. I'm just trying to make sure I understand them properly.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

If I got upset about everything I have no control over I would be as miserable as a lot of people on this board.

 

[HalinTexas]

Every argument here boils down to the "I've got mine, and you can't have any of it" philosophy. Hence, no logic, just rationalizations.

To compare the airline pilot seniority issue to relative levels of judicial position is ridiculous. Judges are politically appointed, and advance without regard to seniority or longevity; look at the most recent appointment.

Pilots (labor) are their own worst enemy.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Go read some of the USAir "debates" going on. That should be like a scared straight program where they take high school kids into jails. If those hypothetical arguments get pushed too far and both sides get polarized that is where you end up.

 

[jonjuan]

Simple-southwest pilots grabbed their golden tickets when they were hired (despite them really thinking they "earned it" or deserved it" more than anyone else). Airtran pilots finally got their golden tickets and will quickly make up for lost time (I.E. poor wages, poor QOL). No way in heck a southwest fo will be able to leapfrog an airtran captain. It'll be WWIII.

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Jonjuan,

I would like to direct you to the scenario I presented to TYWebb and AFCitrus back on page 7 about halfway down. Please read and comment.

Thanks

 

[emb120driver]

Simple-southwest pilots grabbed their golden tickets when they were hired (despite them really thinking they "earned it" or deserved it" more than anyone else). Airtran pilots finally got their golden tickets and will quickly make up for lost time (I.E. poor wages, poor QOL). No way in heck a southwest fo will be able to leapfrog an airtran captain. It'll be WWIII.

I'm sorry, why is your 6 year captain more "deserving" than a SWA 8 year FO? "Leapfrog," my a$$.

 

[The Prussian]

I hear crickets in broad daylight....

 

[bugchaser]

Simple-southwest pilots grabbed their golden tickets when they were hired (despite them really thinking they "earned it" or deserved it" more than anyone else). Airtran pilots finally got their golden tickets and will quickly make up for lost time (I.E. poor wages, poor QOL). No way in heck a southwest fo will be able to leapfrog an airtran captain. It'll be WWIII.

So you think that a 7 year Captain from the Acquired carrier should be put in front of a SW FO that has been there 9 years? Boy are you gonna be disappointed! If THAT happens it will be far beyond WWIII! Your line of thinking is Un-Freeking believable! Trying to get the golden egg and eat the goose too? We shall see.

 

[Just thinking]

"If Swa was being integrated on to the American list, I would not expect any one not senior enough on the new list to hold CA to "keep their seat". Possibly pay protection."

"So you think that a 7 year Captain from the Acquired carrier should be put in front of a SW FO that has been there 9 years? Boy are you gonna be disappointed!"

Point to ponder....... I am certain that the senior FO's at SWA have flown with Captains at SWA that were junior to them. Look at the most junior Captain at SWA..... why didn't every FO senior to him take the upgrade????

If a 10 year SWA FO bypassed upgrade to Captain for whatever reason and an 7 year SWA FO took the upgrade and was at the bottom of the seniority list for SWA Captains in Oakland and then SWA stopped upgrades..... could that 10 year SWA FO now demand that the 7 year Captain be displaced to FO or would that 7 year Captain keep his seat?

If there was a reduction in the flying reducing the number of Captains and the 7 year Captain was displaced, when the company started the upgrades again would the 7 year SWA Captain/FO have priority over the 10 year SWA FO who now decides to take the upgrade?

My belief is that SWA folks will do just fine (with fences) and looking at the rate that SWA has opened the gates for the ground school there will be plenty of movement well before the SLI is completed. Is every 7-9 year SWA FO going to jump at the chance to upgrade now that the school house will start churning them out or will they wait to see what happens with the bids?

 

[Bwipilot]

Maybe AA will buy SW and bump
Every Captain who has been there
Less than 20 years back to the right
Seat.

Maybe then the SW guys would have
A better grasp of "reality""

If an American pilot made more money that the SWA pilot, that would be fair. However, actually looking at pay would result in a much different result than you propose.

You'd likely get a better grasp of reality if you compared the W-2s of the American Captains and SWA Captains. You'd also understand why SWA pilots will feel justified in defending their position as having one of the best jobs in the industry. SWA pilots posses very good pay rates and the most productive work rules in the profession.

SWA pilots want to protect their seniority just as much as the Airtran pilots want the huge jump in pay and working conditions. Hence, there will be considerable banter well past the final outcome.

 

[General Lee]

So you think that a 7 year Captain from the Acquired carrier should be put in front of a SW FO that has been there 9 years? Boy are you gonna be disappointed! If THAT happens it will be far beyond WWIII! Your line of thinking is Un-Freeking believable! Trying to get the golden egg and eat the goose too? We shall see.

Hey FRIENDS. HOPE YOUR DAY IS GOING GREAT. Anyways, a 2000 hire at NWA was put behind a 2007 hire at DL. But, that 2000 hire at NWA was furloughed and got back to NWA in 2005(?), but eventually got credit for the years out on furlough when he was merged in with Delta. (At NWA he would have come back to year 2 or 3 pay, vs coming back to Delta and starting at year 7 or 8) See, in the end, EVERYONE WINS. Right now many of the Delta pilots are about 2 years ahead of the FNWA pilots---for example---a DL pilot hired in 1998 is senior to most of the FNWA pilots hired in 1996. Why was that? The arbitrators decided that was FAIR. It is all up to the arbitrators. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THE EVENTUAL OUTCOME. Your lawyers will fight for each side, and then the arbitrators will decide, and you can blame them and the lawyers. Until then, don't get too wrapped up in these silly debates on FI. It won't matter MY BROTHERS! PEACE AND LOVE.


Regardless, I THINK ALL OF YOU ARE FANTASTIC. YOU MUST HAVE SHOWERED TODAY, BECAUSE YOU ALL SMELL FANTASTIC. And, if you have time today, try to do something nice for someone or something, like creating "food storage devices" for squirrels with used Magnum condums that you found in the trash bin behind your apartment. Hey, they have to store their nuts somewhere, right? See ya!


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Metro752]

Hey General, serious question:

What is the story with the NWA hires that had class canceled on them in 2008? I hear there are about 80 or so swimming in a pool? What is the Delta plan for them after they finish hiring all the lucky sperm clubbers?


Thanks!

 

[General Lee]

Hey General, serious question:

What is the story with the NWA hires that had class canceled on them in 2008? I hear there are about 80 or so swimming in a pool? What is the Delta plan for them after they finish hiring all the lucky sperm clubbers?


Thanks!

I don't really know what will happen with them. That is above my pay grade. Maybe FDJ2 might know.

Have a great day!!

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Metro752]

Alright, thanks!

You have a super special day too! Sweet dreams!

 

[Ty Webb]

Cool with it means the hypothetical situation seems fair to you. You'd be ok with an 08 hire Virgin CA being senior to an 04 hire AT FO. You'd be ok with 07 hire Va capt senior to 93 hire AT Capt.

I take it that this is how Ty and Af feel. If so, that's fine and we'll agree to disagree. I'm just trying to make sure I understand them properly.

Hose:

It's not apples-apples . . . VA is not a profitable carrier; it is still a very risky proposition career-wise. AirTran has a decade of profitability, a half-billion in the bank, 50 aircraft on order, and hiring 22 a month. Regardless, if it is relative seniority, not one AT pilot would move up or down, so it wouldn't be a big deal.

Arguing this stuff isn't going to get us anywhere . . . it seems like it is likely to make things worse for all, not better, so I am going to sit back, decompress, and let the MC's and perhaps Arbitrator work it out. There's really not much we can all do . . . . there's really no sense debating it. I'm sure you're a great guy, and I like to think that I am too, so let's just let our committee folks do their best and agree to accept the final list.

Regards,
Ty

 

[75M]

As far as the Virgin scenario goes, I'd be cool with it. I wouldn't move up, or move down. They (the Virgin guys) took a chance and it paid off. Just like the SENIOR SWA pilots took a chance and it paid off (for them).

The great pay and benefits at SWA are the result of those who BUILT the company (as opposed to those that were hired more recently and feel entitled).

I went throught the TWA/AA debacle and I've heard it all before. Pilots who were hired at a successful airline (when it was on the backside of the growth curve) feel slighted that they have not achieved the same advancement as those who worked to build said airline. As a result, they try to take out their frustration by stealing the seats of the new guys...Nice.

I cannot overstate how nice the words"Allegeny/Mohawk" sound.

Quoted by MadJack:

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.

Is that a threat? What "unintended consequences" do you envision?

Monitors, How far does something like this go before its considered threatening?

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Hose:

It's not apples-apples . . . VA is not a profitable carrier; it is still a very risky proposition career-wise. AirTran has a decade of profitability, a half-billion in the bank, 50 aircraft on order, and hiring 22 a month. Regardless, if it is relative seniority, not one AT pilot would move up or down, so it wouldn't be a big deal.

Arguing this stuff isn't going to get us anywhere . . . it seems like it is likely to make things worse for all, not better, so I am going to sit back, decompress, and let the MC's and perhaps Arbitrator work it out. There's really not much we can all do . . . . there's really no sense debating it. I'm sure you're a great guy, and I like to think that I am too, so let's just let our committee folks do their best and agree to accept the final list.

Regards,
Ty

Ty,

Thanks for the reply. I agree, it does no good to further debate my VA/AirTran analogy, but I think you get my point. I think this pairing can be a great benefit to all of us if we are all fair minded. Lets let our groups work. Besides, "I told that Kraut a ********************ing thousand times, I DONT ROLL ON SHABBOS!!!"

 

[Ty Webb]

Here's a good thread from October.

 

[St. Nic]

This thread is dead- like the farce of "relative" seniority...

 

[xanderman]

What every swinging d!ck has to realize here is that no matter what you think you deserve or are owed or expected your career will end up very different. Get over it! If you haven't realized that yet then you are truly ignorant... I do love the whole "I expected to retire number 3!" BS though. Hell I was supposed to inherit a million dollars from my uncle too! What a bunch of ******************** stains.

 

[Metrojet]

All things being pretty equal, pay rates, benefits, work rules, retirement, etc, I think relative seniority is the way to go.

But you can't say the #1 guy at Virgin goes in equal to the #1 320 pilot at Delta. Nor can you say the #1 747 pilot at Kalitta goes in with the #1 747 pilot at UPS. You are not making a fair comparison.

As someone else said, no two mergers are the same, so you can't use a one size fits all method.

Mich707767 -

First you say "all things being equal - relative seniority is the way to go" - and then in the very next sentence you dispute that? Well what do you really mean then?

Metrojet

 

[doh]

I believe he is saying if two SWAs merged (similar pay, fleet size, etc) then you could expect relative seniority. All things would be about equal. If there are differences, you will see those reflected in the arbitrator's decision. Here, there are differences, so you will get something in-between relative seniority and staple.

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Hose:

It's not apples-apples . . . VA is not a profitable carrier; it is still a very risky proposition career-wise. AirTran has a decade of profitability, a half-billion in the bank, 50 aircraft on order, and hiring 22 a month. Regardless, if it is relative seniority, not one AT pilot would move up or down, so it wouldn't be a big deal.

Arguing this stuff isn't going to get us anywhere . . . it seems like it is likely to make things worse for all, not better, so I am going to sit back, decompress, and let the MC's and perhaps Arbitrator work it out. There's really not much we can all do . . . . there's really no sense debating it. I'm sure you're a great guy, and I like to think that I am too, so let's just let our committee folks do their best and agree to accept the final list.

Regards,
Ty

Ty,

Turns out Virgin IS a profitable carrier. If fact they plan to double in the next 18 months. What do you say about my "hypothetical" now? Just curious. Reminder: 2008 number one behind your '93 number 1? Early 2010 captains keeping their seat in front of ALL of your 2006(?) F.O.s?

Fair? Equatable?

Curious...

 

[Ty Webb]

One quarter with an operating profit doesn't make VA a valid comparison. Sorry. If you were talking about Spirit or JEt Blue it would be a more valid comparison.

 

[Lear70]

Is that a threat? What "unintended consequences" do you envision?

Monitors, How far does something like this go before its considered threatening?

It's not personal. It has to be personal before it's considered "threatening".

It's also one of those relative things. I read his comment and hear references to "the destruction of the Southwest culture and angst for decades to come" if the SLI favors AAI pilots too heavily to the detriment of the SWA pilots.

Either way, I didn't see it as a personal attack or threat, just a generic "be careful what you wish for" statement. If it deteriorates into a personal attack (it's rare on here, but it happens), then we step in.

Hope that answers your question.

/mod

 

[Lear70]

Watch the scab reference, ladies and gentlemen. Open discussion of that is not allowed on this forum for legal liability reasons.

Have a question about it? Send someone a PM. (not me, I get too many PM's as it is and can't answer that kind of a question since I'm a mod).

/mod

 

[400ADude]

Watch the scab reference, ladies and gentlemen. Open discussion of that is not allowed on this forum for legal liability reasons.

Have a question about it? Send someone a PM. (not me, I get too many PM's as it is and can't answer that kind of a question since I'm a mod).

/mod

From the Forum Rules Mr Lear 70 guy:

NO SCAB LISTS or links to scab lists may be placed on these forums. No calling a member/non-member a scab. Violators will be permanently banned at first offense if or when the Websitemaster/moderators feel deemed.

You can discuss it according to the rules, just don't post a link to the list or call somebody one.

Show me your reference. The above quote I gave came from the person who manages/owns this site.