Daniel LaRusso: I'm not advocating getting rid of the seniority system, that won't work. We do however need to negotiate from the bottom up to counter the other side of the table who negotiates from the top down b/c they know we lap it up. I'd rather have OUR bottom come up to our top vs. the other way around which has happened at the pax carriers.
For everyone in the world (except pilots,) "seniority" is a
political system--it, essentially, means, "first hired, last fired," and it protects against political favoritism. It works well. However, during the "regulated" period of airline history, pilots turned seniority into an "economic system." Even back then, it never made economic sense to allocate compensation on the basis of date-of-hire, but it was not a problem because everyone had the same career expectations: One was hired at 23-30 year of age, stayed at the same place for 30 years, and retired with money in the bank. Everyone was on the same page, so to speak.
Now, however, many pilots are on their their own page and, to make things more fair across the board, our system of compensation must have much more flexibility and choice than the traditional notion of seniority can provide. So, definitely, keep seniority as a political system, but understand its severe limitations when it comes to figuring out who is worth how much.
Excellent insight on "bottom up" negotiations.
Bob