Not sure what the complaint is if your percentage in base and bidding power don’t change.

That argument only works if everything stays the same is it is today, which of course is super unlikely...

If you really think anything close to straight relative seniority is about to happen you are really setting yourself up to be unbelievably disappointed... Not even your merger committee was asking for that in its opening day of negotiations.

So you want the SLI to be STRICTLY DOH?

You seem to have inside info. Can you expand on that?

I think the SLI will be much closer to relative % than it will be to longevity.

UAL/CAL merger we were all within 5% of our pre-SLI percentage (not counting the post-merger hires). The UAL pilot junior to me on the final list moved up 3% and I moved down 3% but he had more than 3X the longevity that I had on the merger date and I'm 7 years younger than him, and he wasn't on furlough. This was even AFTER factoring in that UAL had about 3X the number of WB airplanes.

Relative seniority > Longevity

This was under the current ALPA policy as well.

Good luck to all of you.

Both UAL and CAL were legacy carriers. Not a 85 year old company who acquired a start up. This is not a merger. It's an acquisition. DOH is more than fair. If Delta had bought Alaska. I would expect to be at the mercy of the DALPA.

Does ALPA's merger policy break it down this way? If not, the definition of the carriers doesn't seem germane. Just because the pilots define it as an acquisition, doesn't mean it is legally defined that way, and I think that is what will matter during the sorting out of the seniority issues.