Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-12-2012 | 09:43 AM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
10-12-2012 | 09:49 AM
meh
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 828
Likes: 0
Here's an interesting historical change to Delta's policy (years ago) that has had a big impact for me to discuss while we wait for the backdoor to open on the bids.
I met another FO jumpseating home a few weeks ago, same base and category and senior to me. He was maybe 12-14 years younger than me, and said he came into Delta directly from corporate at a young age. I'm a mil background guy, so I expect I had a 12 year-ish delay compared to his start here in age.
Anyways, we got talking and he says that in his initial class, when they assigned seniority numbers, they went by age--oldest guys first. In MY class, they went by social security # as a means to do some "random" acceptable system... but it made me be #40 of 42 in the class, and 6-9 of those folks are on the FO list above me at my base (at any given time), moving me 8-10% down the list... so it's a BIG thing actually.
You'd think a 40# difference would dilute itself out over a large list, but it turns out that everyone at the same spot of the list is thinking the same thing in terms of bid-power vs. quality of life, and on the 6 categories I'd even look at, there are approx 7 each of my classmates sitting just above me... at the bottom line holder of a list area, that is the difference between a decent commutable line and sloppy-seconds-what's-left-redeye-weekend-non-commutable-hell. And then to sit there without moving for 11 years living with the same randomly-generated QOL difference... well, it's annoying.
It seems to me that, while some system has to be employed to rack and stack new classes in seniority, randomly getting boofed by SSAN when different methods were used before is not good. I think using first some sort of test scores from class would be the most fair--basing the stacking by merit. If no such objective scores exist, then I'd go with who sent their resume in first, or date/timestamp of their employment offer--first come first serve. After that I think going by age, oldest first, is more fair than random... come on, some guy 10 years younger than me can afford 40 seniority #s more than I randomly can. No matter what method you pick, someone is going to complain, but this one would be supportable maybe. Probably open them up to age discrimination suit.
Anyways, just a wondering how it was done in the past, how it's being done now. I did hear that someone had sued for the process used for giving seniority #s on initial class, but don't know if that's true or what their position was, or the results. Anyone know?
I met another FO jumpseating home a few weeks ago, same base and category and senior to me. He was maybe 12-14 years younger than me, and said he came into Delta directly from corporate at a young age. I'm a mil background guy, so I expect I had a 12 year-ish delay compared to his start here in age.
Anyways, we got talking and he says that in his initial class, when they assigned seniority numbers, they went by age--oldest guys first. In MY class, they went by social security # as a means to do some "random" acceptable system... but it made me be #40 of 42 in the class, and 6-9 of those folks are on the FO list above me at my base (at any given time), moving me 8-10% down the list... so it's a BIG thing actually.
You'd think a 40# difference would dilute itself out over a large list, but it turns out that everyone at the same spot of the list is thinking the same thing in terms of bid-power vs. quality of life, and on the 6 categories I'd even look at, there are approx 7 each of my classmates sitting just above me... at the bottom line holder of a list area, that is the difference between a decent commutable line and sloppy-seconds-what's-left-redeye-weekend-non-commutable-hell. And then to sit there without moving for 11 years living with the same randomly-generated QOL difference... well, it's annoying.
It seems to me that, while some system has to be employed to rack and stack new classes in seniority, randomly getting boofed by SSAN when different methods were used before is not good. I think using first some sort of test scores from class would be the most fair--basing the stacking by merit. If no such objective scores exist, then I'd go with who sent their resume in first, or date/timestamp of their employment offer--first come first serve. After that I think going by age, oldest first, is more fair than random... come on, some guy 10 years younger than me can afford 40 seniority #s more than I randomly can. No matter what method you pick, someone is going to complain, but this one would be supportable maybe. Probably open them up to age discrimination suit.
Anyways, just a wondering how it was done in the past, how it's being done now. I did hear that someone had sued for the process used for giving seniority #s on initial class, but don't know if that's true or what their position was, or the results. Anyone know?
10-12-2012 | 10:00 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
10-12-2012 | 10:06 AM
On Reserve
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes: 0
From: MSP7ERB
Roadkill, most of the fNWA captains I've flown with said age was the discriminator as you say. I'm not sure about fDAL, but I'll bet it was the same. I was given the last four of SSN for ranking seniority as well. I would prefer to have age taken into account, but I'm not complaining.
BTW - did my first airline app recommendation for a friend.
BTW - did my first airline app recommendation for a friend.
10-12-2012 | 10:24 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
so 87 717s? if that one is made airworthy, let it come last.
10-12-2012 | 10:34 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
10-12-2012 | 11:06 AM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
I'd say the real numbers will be much more apparent to all of us over the next few months, and beyond. Can't wait to see how you'll spin that.
10-12-2012 | 11:15 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Here's an interesting historical change to Delta's policy (years ago) that has had a big impact for me to discuss while we wait for the backdoor to open on the bids.
I met another FO jumpseating home a few weeks ago, same base and category and senior to me. He was maybe 12-14 years younger than me, and said he came into Delta directly from corporate at a young age. I'm a mil background guy, so I expect I had a 12 year-ish delay compared to his start here in age.
Anyways, we got talking and he says that in his initial class, when they assigned seniority numbers, they went by age--oldest guys first. In MY class, they went by social security # as a means to do some "random" acceptable system... but it made me be #40 of 42 in the class, and 6-9 of those folks are on the FO list above me at my base (at any given time), moving me 8-10% down the list... so it's a BIG thing actually.
You'd think a 40# difference would dilute itself out over a large list, but it turns out that everyone at the same spot of the list is thinking the same thing in terms of bid-power vs. quality of life, and on the 6 categories I'd even look at, there are approx 7 each of my classmates sitting just above me... at the bottom line holder of a list area, that is the difference between a decent commutable line and sloppy-seconds-what's-left-redeye-weekend-non-commutable-hell. And then to sit there without moving for 11 years living with the same randomly-generated QOL difference... well, it's annoying.
It seems to me that, while some system has to be employed to rack and stack new classes in seniority, randomly getting boofed by SSAN when different methods were used before is not good. I think using first some sort of test scores from class would be the most fair--basing the stacking by merit. If no such objective scores exist, then I'd go with who sent their resume in first, or date/timestamp of their employment offer--first come first serve. After that I think going by age, oldest first, is more fair than random... come on, some guy 10 years younger than me can afford 40 seniority #s more than I randomly can. No matter what method you pick, someone is going to complain, but this one would be supportable maybe. Probably open them up to age discrimination suit.
Anyways, just a wondering how it was done in the past, how it's being done now. I did hear that someone had sued for the process used for giving seniority #s on initial class, but don't know if that's true or what their position was, or the results. Anyone know?
I met another FO jumpseating home a few weeks ago, same base and category and senior to me. He was maybe 12-14 years younger than me, and said he came into Delta directly from corporate at a young age. I'm a mil background guy, so I expect I had a 12 year-ish delay compared to his start here in age.
Anyways, we got talking and he says that in his initial class, when they assigned seniority numbers, they went by age--oldest guys first. In MY class, they went by social security # as a means to do some "random" acceptable system... but it made me be #40 of 42 in the class, and 6-9 of those folks are on the FO list above me at my base (at any given time), moving me 8-10% down the list... so it's a BIG thing actually.
You'd think a 40# difference would dilute itself out over a large list, but it turns out that everyone at the same spot of the list is thinking the same thing in terms of bid-power vs. quality of life, and on the 6 categories I'd even look at, there are approx 7 each of my classmates sitting just above me... at the bottom line holder of a list area, that is the difference between a decent commutable line and sloppy-seconds-what's-left-redeye-weekend-non-commutable-hell. And then to sit there without moving for 11 years living with the same randomly-generated QOL difference... well, it's annoying.
It seems to me that, while some system has to be employed to rack and stack new classes in seniority, randomly getting boofed by SSAN when different methods were used before is not good. I think using first some sort of test scores from class would be the most fair--basing the stacking by merit. If no such objective scores exist, then I'd go with who sent their resume in first, or date/timestamp of their employment offer--first come first serve. After that I think going by age, oldest first, is more fair than random... come on, some guy 10 years younger than me can afford 40 seniority #s more than I randomly can. No matter what method you pick, someone is going to complain, but this one would be supportable maybe. Probably open them up to age discrimination suit.
Anyways, just a wondering how it was done in the past, how it's being done now. I did hear that someone had sued for the process used for giving seniority #s on initial class, but don't know if that's true or what their position was, or the results. Anyone know?
10-12-2012 | 11:37 AM
Looking for a laugh
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
As a Jan 01 hire, our class was done by age. It wasn't until we started hiring again in 07 that it was changed to SSN because of an age discrimination lawsuit.
10-12-2012 | 11:45 AM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Most of the people got some money out of it after the reordering of the classes that had previously run, but I didn't get any since my class just rotated around me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
