Originally Posted by
SpecialTracking
Relative seniority would place 1000-1400 younger pilots in front of older pilots with more longevity. This would essentially stagnate the older pilot's seniority progression during the latter part of their career.
A 35 year career at a widebody airline (100+) and not making widebody captain is quite the slap. Some would want to diminish the widebody airplane and it's career value for argumentative sake, but historical bidding patterns show otherwise.
While one cannot draw a picture of what the future holds, one side made a far reaching attempt to do so in their presentation. The objective methodology would utilize what is front of you where your argument is based on the current fleet and attrition through retirements. The farther you stray from that premise, the more subjective you get. It then becomes a seniority list produced by irrational design versus one built on facts and policy.
I find most of what you said to contradict itself. The age of a pilot is not mentioned as a cornerstone of the new Alpa merger policy, therefore in your eyes has no bearing on these negotiations. A younger pilot at CAL with the same longevity cannot be punished due to his age.
I can draw an equally as plausible picture of UAL. Nobody merges with UAL, all the shrinking to right size for a merger, United cannot survive and is parted out to the highest bidders. No job protections, everyone laid off, no more wide body Captain slots you been dreaming about. I realize this didn't happen, but it is equally as plausible as your scenario.
If you want another prediction, here it is.
Arbitrators use the UAL program that produced all the eye burning charts, but with the furloughed pilots excluded from the calculations.
I don't know where everyone ends up in that scenario If it doesn't go something close to relative, I think that is the way it will go.
One last thought. Anyone want to predict how many pages on this thread before the decision is announced?