I'll explain "fair". In the civilian world anyway. I'm going to be a little flippant, but there is a lot of truth in what I'm saying. "Fair" is who has the better lawyer. The seniority system takes the attorney out of the equation. The military does not have to worry about that.... you cannot sue your chain of command for judgment calls ....

But you can sure sue your civilian bosses for real or PERCEIVED "injustices". Imagine trying to decide who is "more qualified" for a move to Captain -- when you have openings for 40 captains positions right now, but a qualified pool of 1430 guys right now. The seniority system lets all qualified guys bid for the 40 slots. They go to training. They still have to pass. The seniority system does not allow for unqualified or guys not meeting the standard set by the FAA and company to fly in the seat --- they still have to pass the tests. However, lets say that management has total authority to "pick" the 40 guys from the pool of 1430..... I guarantee you there will be real or "perceived" unfairness and someone will get an attorney and sue for the injustice. If they win it will cost the company $$$$. The seniority system has eliminated that.

That was the biggest disappointment in the original Washington Post article. The cost over the years TO the AIRLINE COMPANIES from lawsuits for favoritism, discrimination, injustice etc. was not COVERED by the reporter. This cost and the suits have been eliminated by the seniority system that all parties AGREED TO!!!!!!! Is it perfect--- NO!!!! But nobody has come up with a better system that is favorable to all parties. Remember, lawsuits can KILL a corporation or company---

The seniority system is the most "fair" system we have. It is totally objective, taking out all biases and perceptions.