Originally Posted by
DeltaboundRedux
2 extra potential years at the airline and that's worth upending 90+ years of seniority system history?
Yeah, sure. That seems reasonable.
Chesterton's Fence applies. As it always does.
We're up to 7 years now big fella. Practically everyone in their 60s was hired when the age was 60. So now 65, soon 67. It's not going to stop.
And the system we're using now (PBS based systems) are only about 15-20 years old.
Pre-bankruptcy/ Pre-9/11, the system was more fair/level across the seniority system. SWAs system is still fair because they still are using the old system. Alaska is going to PBS if they haven't already with their new UPA. The PBS model is a "super-seniority" model that was never intended except to "sell" the system to the senior guys to get the camel's nose into the tent. With the old system, you could bid to get more time off with vacation. Now you can't. The lines were built to be more fair. The senior got to pick their poison then the Jr last. However under the old system, a schedule wasn't perfect. We all had to take a bit of bad with the good. Want all weekends off? Maybe you have to fly to Tulsa OK or Mexico City all month. Choose to work the weekends? Maybe you get more CUN and HNL layovers.
So you don't think it's fair that everyone get a pick of a few days off before PBS gives everyone in the top 15-20% everything?
Who here thinks the age limit will stop at 67? I don't. 90 years ago the age was 60. Also, the life expectancy 90 years ago was in the 60s. Now we're looking at late 70s on average.
The system was never built for a moving goalpost that only benefits the lucky ones that got all of the good from the previous pilots mandatory retirement and then get to camp out on the top for an extra 2 years.
I'm not saying I'm against 67, but with age 67/67+ we do need to stop propping up the super senior.