Originally Posted by
untied
Right now, CAL looks better. UAL has way more retirements coming which would have helped a LOT!
The problem with "relative seniority" is that some guys who are supposed to retire in the top 2% and have a REALLY great last 10 years wouldn't break the top 20% if the CAL guys got their windfall.
I'm just glad relative seniority isn't a player.
First, you might want to look at the retirement schedule in relation to size. Relatively, they are extremely close.
Secondly, you need to look at your "relative seniority" statement, and apply it to how our individual airlines current path was working out. That would change a lot of career expectations.
Thirdly, if you think relative seniority is not a player, you might want to check with your merger committee, both merger committees agreed it is a player.
Lastly, neither side will get a windfall, we will all be disappointed a bit except for #1...