Originally Posted by
Scott Stoops
My opinion doesn't count either, but I think you really should read up on the process, and actually read the opening letters.
There is no possible way that you can effectively merge Cap with Cap and F/O with F/O in the manner that I think you're advocating. The process agreement ensures that no pilot on either independent list will move ahead of the next adjacent pilot on said list regardless of what seat they actually hold currently. There will be no shuffling of the individual lists. I believe the LCAL opener is advocating merging Cap to Cap, etc in a slotting scheme that respects the individual lists. IMHO, this is a very unlikely outcome as it completely disregards ALPA merger policy (the components of which were basically left unmentioned in the LCal opening letter). Even before changes to ALPA merger policy after the Nic award (which is a major reset of ALPA merger policy), all of the most recent mergers included a slotting scheme that respected differences between aircraft brought to the merger.
In virtually ever merger several things are done on preparation for the actual SLI hearings. First seniority lists are verified by each side to insure that the dead, retired ect.. are not on the lists and each name is correct. Then the list is stove piped where each pilot is placed in the highest paying position they can hold. This prevents leapfrogging. Normally the lists used are based on a constructive date of merger which is normally the date the merger was made public so changes or upgrades after that have no effect.