Originally Posted by
4andCounting
I find it interesting that people think longevity is of a common currency value. One year of longevity at one company does not equal the same value as another. If you get hired at a rapidly growing organization, or one with high turn over, your advancement in seniority would result in a high relative value to your longevity. If you get hired by a stagnant company that hasn't grown, fallen on rough economic times or has little to no turn over, the appraisal of your longevity would not hold as much value on a per year basis.
This is of course assuming you consider a year of service to be "worth" something.
I understand where pilots get attached to the DOH/Longevity thing because we live in a seniority based system. But that currency only trades equal if all things remain the same. You exchange rate would to vary significantly once yoh leave the borders of your localized seniority list.
Just a thought.
-4
True, but when relative and longevity are roughly equal then there’s no reason for one side to benefit over the other. Both proposals do not reflect that.