You do know that Date of Hire was not used in seniority integration, right?
Any chance of using DOH for integrating purposes was screwed the day the 9E committee submitted the initial seniority list that had the date of hire column as our sim date. I like how the 9E committee then claimed that we made it clear from day 1 that our class date was our DOH for integrating purposes, however, that is false. Once the Mesaba merger committee disputed it, there was the initial response from JH, and Mesaba's JM responded with their stance on our DOH issue. At that point, Bloch emailed saying, and I quote: "John, could you please clarify this."
That's within that email chain. The fact that Bloch even had to ask US to clarify the DOH position that late into the game clearly indicates to me that our group failed to represent our interests fairly. They never got the message across to the other committees, nor arbitrator Bloch, which is why Bloch asked our group for clarification well after the April 15 hearings were closed. In the following email, that is when the 9E committee took a low blow and stated that we have received additional information today about further turboprop reductions, but this committee will not be entering this information on record.
Lets face it, Bloch saw through the 9E committee's incompetency at handling the seniority list and at their low blow on the Saab reductions. Also, an outright staple proposal of Colgan was something that definitely didn't go well with Bloch, and he therefore fenced us off for the entire 5 years from Saabs. If you pretend they don't exist, then they will not exist for you.
Last edited: