Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
Actually Denny, I think that is EXACTLY what will happen. The arbitrators may even go to both sides privately and say just that.
If I was on the NWA team, my bottom line position of what I would accept in negotiations would be a straight mathematical ratio right down to the .000001%. Then apply a minimal fence IF dynamic seniority was instituted. With dynamic seniority, NWA will only get credit for retirements that actually happen. Same for DAL when their retirements begin to spool up. I know people will pipe up about how that's the most unfair SLI proposal they've ever heard, but if NWA guys can't achieve that via negotiations, then I would take the chance with arbitration.
Denny, you are the king of the typewritten mental picture!
Carl - sadly, not Denny Crane
Carl,
A straight ratio is probably the fairest, but I think that using a dynamic list will create a mess for the categories in the future. So do you reshuffle EVERY category for the next umpteen years every time a pilot retires? You could never count on your relative position in a category month to month. Then there is the question about only making a list "dynamic" because of retirements. What about fleet retirements and previously announced growth airplanes. I think Delta guys lose if a dynamic list involves only retirements and the whole pilot group loses if we have to live under a dynamic list for years. Straight ratio and call it even for your nearterm retirements and our nearterm orders and mid to long term retirements
Cog