And they never need re-tucking. I love that. Those other shirts need to be fitted or your are literally swimming in em.
Heyas ACL,
Agreed. Made the mistake of buying "normal" shirts and they were like a tent. I had the nice lady at the dry cleaners put darts in the back for $3 each and they fit better, but getting the tapered versions are a better move.
Says something about the typical pilot physique when the normal shirts are blimp style...
So, while I still can't explain how it happened at different proportions for different parts of the NWA list, I think most NWA pilots saw an increase in relative seniority of between 1%-4%, because of whatever pull plug method they used. I am fairly sure the last DALALPA proposal did not include this "bump" for retirements.
It is puzzling how it worked out for different parts of the list. Keep in mind though, as I understand it, all long term sick were taken out of both lists and re-inserted after the ratioing. If that is the case, the numbers of LTS at NW in excess of those at DL (I heard you have more) - would act in the same manner as the 274 pull-and-plug. (I'm sure this would have been thought of, though) You were right about the benefits of the NW attrition. Even though I lost .5% on the merged list, my projected # at age 65 retirement stand-alone was 80, now it is 92, indicating only 12 NW pilots senior and younger..(of about 300 something) Indeed, I doubt you will hear many complaints from the top 2000 or so original DL pilots.
Quote:
Also, the only thing that can makes a ratioed list digestable for most NWA pilots is the lack of fences on your 767's. Or, at least that is what I am preaching to the guys I'm flying with. What they/we lost in DOH seniority can be made up for by the amount of 767's you bring to the table. I might be the first NWA guy on this forum to concede this, but it's true.
It is exactly true. And that is exactly why we made such a big deal about the 767s, and exactly why you tryed to minimize them during our whole "battle campaign" over the SLI.(-not trying to stir anything up!) 101 unfenced true widebodies is significant, as are the 32 unfenced A330s for us.
Quote:
So, it does help that there are no fences to the widebodies, and I'm fairly sure DALALPA's last proposal had fences for your 767's long and high.
Actually we proposed fences only on the 777 and 767-400, and your 747s and 787s, and it was for 3 years, I think. That would have left 80 unfenced 767-300s, and, of course your 32 A330s...but I agree, better not having any 767s or A330s fenced.
Quote:
In my opinion, both sides have reason to gripe about this arbitrated list and it was best that the arbitrators did it. The bottom line is that both sides have a problem with "pilot mixing." Our side hates where we fell in the list compared to DAL pilots DOH around our new seniority. Your side hates where you fell on the list compared to what aircraft the NWA pilots flies on the list around your seniority.
We both have to get over it and move on, it's an intergrated world we live in now.
Respectfully,
New K Now
I agree New, and will add that there is something psychologically "disconcerting" (to say the least) about being paired with someone on the list who was hired 6, 5, 4 etc. years after you, even though it is mitigated by the fairness of retaining the same (or better) relative %. It is when you have that unfavorable difference in hire dates and a loss of relative seniority that might rightfully generate more complaints..... FWIW, the only portion of the list that both those happened to was, as far as I know, the late 1991 hires at DAL, ie. -paired with 1995 NW and lost rel. % seniority....(there may be others who experienced both hits, but these are the only ones I know of)
I agree New, and will add that there is something psychologically "disconcerting" (to say the least) about being paired with someone on the list who was hired 6, 5, 4 etc. years after you, even though it is mitigated by the fairness of retaining the same (or better) relative %. It is when you have that unfavorable difference in hire dates and a loss of relative seniority that might rightfully generate more complaints..... FWIW, the only portion of the list that both those happened to was, as far as I know, the late 1991 hires at DAL, ie. -paired with 1995 NW and lost rel. % seniority....(there may be others who experienced both hits, but these are the only ones I know of)
I lost 1% relative and approximately 2 years on DOH as a 1988 hire.
Linear Mode
