Originally Posted by
jsled
Not denying there was "qualifying and mitigating language". Just that Dal's proposal was Status and Catergory ratio, and NWA's proposal was Date of Hire. The Board decided that "the Status and Category approach was more fair and equitable". They went with Dal's proposal (with tweeks and exceptions).
With quite a few tweaks and exceptions, don't you think? In fact, enough tweaks and excerptions that the final list really didn't resemble the proposed Delta Committee list. Also, in rejecting the date of hire methodology, it appears that the ratio method adopted seemed to trump longevity, don't you also think?
Well, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
As you, sir, are entitled to yours.
Now, if you claim to be clairvoyant, I suppose you can posit how this arbitration is going to turn out. I don't have that talent, but only venture that the final list will look nothing like what either committee proposes.