Hey MCDU (and all who think like him),
Here's a serious question that I hope will help you explain your position.
Say a pilot is hired at airline A, then is furloughed a month later (don't worry about probationary periods, etc). The next year a different pilot is hired at airline B. Ten years later the first pilot is finally recalled at airline A, and a day later, it is announced that airlines A and B are merging.
According to your theory, the first pilot who has one month and one day working with the airline should be placed ahead of pilot B who's been with his airline for ten years and now may be a Captain. Fences may exist, but in reality, that first pilot will then forever be ahead of the second pilot on the seniority list.
My question is, is that fair? The first pilot may not have even made it through initial training, yet by your method he is supposed to be ahead of the second pilot. If you think that this case is correct, please explain why someone with so little time at the company should be placed ahead of someone with vastly more experience at the same company.
If you think that isn't right, then where is the cutoff? How many years difference in service should there be before it doesn't feel right to merge by DOH? Or how many years of longevity should a pilot have before it becomes OK to go DOH?
It's a useful tool to use here - stretching an idea to its limits to see if that idea really has merit. Whether we're talking about mathematics, economics, or airline mergers, sometimes it works well to find an extreme in order to make sense of a subject.
HAL