Originally Posted by
inline five
I think it's bogus from a moral standpoint to put a 26 year old 2013 hire senior to a 55 year old 1998 hire but that is what the west and east lists do. Basically the 3rd listers are arguing from a west perspective at this point.
The west's list was always the way to go. It's the only fair way to do a seniority list. Age and Doh should have no meaning on a seniority list. If you were 90% before the merger you should be 90% after the merger. Having over a thousand people on furlough does that.