Originally Posted by
wiggy
Again, Carl, "looking ahead" in this manner is a far, far cry from the actual construction of a list based entirely on future attrition that benefits one pilot group only. (Please see my post #20, I assume you agree with the conclusions I draw?) BTW, why do you suppose ALPA got rid of any mention of DOH in their merger policy? That would be an interesting discussion.....and might shead some light on our current "predicament".
Your premise as to NWA using "look ahead" as the basis for
constructing the seniority list is completely wrong. You seem to be implying that NWA is using that to somehow justify our whacky notion of DOH. If that is what you are implying, it shows how your own personal bias is blinding you. And your not alone.
NWA does not need to defend DOH as a methodology. It has been used in whole or in part for many arbitrated lists. NWA guys offer no apologies for wanting credit for every day of service from our airline - and thus we need no justification. Especially since the arbitrator's opinion is that we are a merger of equals. There is an inherent fairness to the DOH concept. If the demographics were reversed, every Delta pilot would see this with complete clarity. The "look ahead" is used to show why a 10 year fence is needed to protect
DAL pilots until most of the senior NWA guys are gone. The 10 year fence doesn't protect NWA pilots. Since we are asking to be credited for every day that we have worked at NWA, we don't need the protection. We could have just proffered DOH without a fence, but then our award would be just as extreme as the DAL proposal.
Once again...the look ahead program was used to construct the fences, not the DOH seniority list. And we don't need a look ahead program to "justify" the DOH methodology given its long history in mergers. Especially in this merger of equals.
Carl