I don’t think it was unfair when you consider this SLI is a direct result of the 2010 change to the ALPA merger policy which came about after the US/AW debacle. “Longevity” was thrown in now as one of the 3 tenets for consideration with no particular weight. With status/category the same and very similar career expectations, the only tenet left that could play a large role was longevity. That ended up happening here.

I don’t buy the notion that this SLI fault is the management responsibility since they bought a carrier and merged us. That’s true but the SLI process is an entirely union thing for an ALPA-ALPA merger. Management did not assess us $1 million dollars for SLI. The union did. And we went through a union-approved process with union-approved language and arbitration procedures. The final result is a product of ALPA and its merger policy procedures.

I’m just glad we voted in ALPA in the nick of time. If you thought this SLI result was bad, you should try it without ALPA.