Originally Posted by
untied
Career expectations are only part of what will decide the SLI. They must follow the new ALPA merger policy that includes longevity and "fairness".
I'm supposed to retire #160 at UAL. My whole career was slowed down by BK and the age 65 rule change. The only bright spot is when the retirements start and I finally get to enjoy some seniority. Now there are CAL pilots that think I should be placed behind a 2007 hire. The last time a large group of pilots lost that much seniority, USAir left the union. ALPA can't afford to have that happen again, and that's why they changed the merger policy to include longevity.
So....all you guys talking about "relative seniority" better take a look at the official merger policy. IT'S NOT IN THERE!!
May want to also note in the very policy that you refer too.......
Paraphrasing as I don't have it right in front of me
The new policy states that the factors that must be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list, in NO particular order and with NO particular weight, now include but are NOT LIMITED to career expectations, longevity, and status and category.
Looking at that note within the "rework" paraphrased above, what prevents any Tri-Panel of interjecting recent/past precedence....IE - Something that DAL/NWA conducted in their SLI......I am NOT saying carbon-copy, but any parts or concepts. If you think the 3 basic Merger "rework" variables are that, and that only, your sorely mistaken. The Tri-Panel "can" consider (introduce) other variables within their 'equation' for their construction.^^^^ NOT LIMITED ^^^^
Encourage you to look at the "rewrite" and read what's written by way of the "paraphrase" above.