Fleet basing post merger
#81
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Well, Eaglefly....I see you've met my drunk uncle. Whew, he is something when he's had a few, isn't he? You should see him at Christmas! Don't let his ranting influence your opinion of the intertwining of our families. A few frustrations await. A lot of good things lay ahead. We'll see you on the line.
#83
Banned
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Wouldn't the Nic potentially rearrange the merged U list differently than without it ? The arrangment of U pilots on the final list determines its weight (top heavy/bottom heavy) due to pervious relative seniority and age, BOTH of which affect retirements and advancement schedules, BOTH of which could improve or reduce a possible windfall for those junior on the West. The end result might be a shorter or longer fence for widebodies (career expectation) and possibly even narrowbody captain ratios. For the record, with my juniority, fences won't do much for me, so I have no personal agenda. By the time they fell, I'd still not likely be senior enough for a group 2 captains slot and widebody F/O slots in the most junior domiciles normally aren't fenced anyway. Many of the more senior long-time FO's at AA who've been watching the parade go by for upwards of 15 years would be the likely protectee's.
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
Eaglefly is right on this. Starting with the Nic would put large numbers of relatively young guys at higher relative positions, slowing the progression of those AA slotted below them vs. starting with DOH or a 3 way.
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
IMO, living up to your end of any "bargains" occurred many years ago.......Well, actually failed to occur. Your group chose the path of BINDING arbitration and then subverted the outcome when it wasn't to your satisfaction. Everything since than has been foam on the beer.
Your last sentence hits the spot though and is the crux of my point on this issue. If the Nic is used and IMO, is far and away the most likely outcome of your fracas, then fences become more likely. That's all I've said, but obviously disagreement on this subject, like so many others usually results in attack from die-hard USAPAites. To be equally frank, my assumption of you as a person is also made by your arguments here and not so much your beliefs (which you're entitled to), but your penchant for spring boarding to personal attack when in disagreement.
That speaks louder than anything.
Your last sentence hits the spot though and is the crux of my point on this issue. If the Nic is used and IMO, is far and away the most likely outcome of your fracas, then fences become more likely. That's all I've said, but obviously disagreement on this subject, like so many others usually results in attack from die-hard USAPAites. To be equally frank, my assumption of you as a person is also made by your arguments here and not so much your beliefs (which you're entitled to), but your penchant for spring boarding to personal attack when in disagreement.
That speaks louder than anything.
On the Nic you ignore what came first, the TA. You won't answer my question. If this merger gave you a lousy outcome on the SLI,and the company was offering a lousy contract that would implement it, would you vote yes for it when you didn't have to? That's what we faced, no matter what method we used.
#86
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
"Arrogance" is a perception that is often in error and especially on the internet, hypersensitivity can alter perception. Disagreement is one thing, personal attack the other. I've never "condensed" U pilots and in the arrogance department, you've excelled with superiority on this forum, so it surprises me it's you who claims this insult.
On the Nic you ignore what came first, the TA. You won't answer my question. If this merger gave you a lousy outcome on the SLI,and the company was offering a lousy contract that would implement it, would you vote yes for it when you didn't have to? That's what we faced, no matter what method we used.
I'm sorry, but I was never much of a fan of magicians.
#88
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
I have no desire to spar with anyone. Never thought of myself as a "heavyweight" either, but thanks for the sentiment. R57's a pretty smart guy (more informed then me on many subjects), so depending on the subject, I doubt you'd get a clear victor oberall. My knowledge of USAPA just spins my moral compass too wildly to believe in their course. At any rate, it shouldn't be too long before a definitive resolution to this conundrum occurs, but then we'll have to invent a new conflict to keep the fireworks going.

Perhaps an announcement of the acquisition of Jet Blue BEFORE the AA/U SLI is arbitrated. Wouldn't THAT be a hoot ?
#89
The Nic came before the merger announcement, it's just the union you support wants to convince others it doesn't exist as if that is somehow reality. USAPA was formed for ONLY ONE REASON and that was to subvert the binding arbitration process that was agreed to, but whose outcome wasn't favorable to the majority and that is the ONLY reason the Nic doesn't yet exist as the sole U seniority list. In effect, you want me to agree to what is realy a strawman argument. You're arguing a position that is a magic act demanding I look stage left, so as not to notice the actual trick occuring on stage right.
I'm sorry, but I was never much of a fan of magicians.
Yours truly TOOL..
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
From: Airbus
Do you two realize you are wasting our time... if you want to argue do it via private message. Otherwise we all just have to scroll down through the immaturity.
This thread is supposed to be about fleet basing post merger, not two guy's egos.
This thread is supposed to be about fleet basing post merger, not two guy's egos.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



