|
Another point to consider regarding commuting is that if the NW version (which I think is much better for commuters) were brought to DAL, how many pilots who choose not to commute, would then start to consider commuting? I had to commute because I was displaced - I hated it and swore I would never voluntarily commute again - but if we get a very generous commuting policy then I, and many others, may reconsider. It is pretty obvious that the former NW guys are very closely aligned as far as seniority and seat position goes. DAL is much less so aligned - could this be because NW's policy makes it easier to commute and thus follow the money? Is this good or bad? I guess it depends on if you commute or live in base.
It will always be a tradeoff. If the company makes us bargain for it, how about a 2% raise or the better commuting policy - you can choose one or the other. It was once brought up at DAL to try to get one positive space vacation pass a year per family member. The outcry against it was deafening because people thought it would "cost too much" at the bargaining table. I was shocked and would have thought it was a "no-brainer," which leads me to my final point - with such a vaired group with varied intrests - nothing is a no-brainer. Scoop |
Originally Posted by Adolphus Coors
(Post 527074)
1. LOL, I agree!
2. I will try to make it simple. On the bid posting there may be a surplus or a vacancy, or both. When the computer runs the bid it starts with the most senior guy and determines if he has a bid in for a vacancy if he does it awards the vacancy to him. If he didn't the computer would see if he is in a surplus category, if he is it would displace him based on his preferences and if there is someone junior to him in the category. Backfill is when a pilot creates a vacancy because he was awarded a new position. The company may choose to fill this new vacancy or not. Recently 4 FOs bid off the CVG M88 B and onto the CVG 7ER B. The computer determined that there were now 4 vacancies, but instead of awarding them via seniority they gave them to displaced pilots who were junior. This happened because the bid was run as a surplus and vacancy. The junior displaced pilots were awarded the vacant seats because there was someone junior to them on the equipment even though several more senior pilots wanted those seats. Got it! Thanks |
Originally Posted by Barracuda
(Post 527090)
MEC elections coming up. Moak time at the helm must come to an end. He may be a nice guy, and have good will, but his actions got us the SLI we have. The fact of the matter is: we should've been able to vote on this SLI, and Moak thought we weren't "smart" enough to decide what's good for us. Moak's got to go, who else is running? Maybe somebody who believes pilots should decide how to receive their "future awards" if any, meaning, into the retirement account or as income, or, maybe somebody who beliefs pilots should be able to vote on vital issues as "SLI". The fact of the matter is Moak knew we weren't going to be happy with this SLI and he wanted to make sure that something as insignificant as the people he's supposed to represent didn't get in his way of making this merger happen at any cost.
So, once again, who is running? |
Originally Posted by Kingbird87
(Post 527104)
An inverse proportional integer relationship will be applied to mutually nonquadratic functions. In the event a resultant nonlinear vector overrides systematic boolean logic, a piece of chalk will be shoved up your a$$.
Got it! Thanks |
I'm not a lawyer, but I do play one on TV....I'm Denny's personal scotch carrier.
Anyway, I would argue that from a legal standpoint we did vote on the SLI. We voted on the process and both sides voted yes. I agree with Sailing, that is as good as it's going to get. Once again I'll remind everyone. Someday our new hires will care less, don't bother boring them with your "I got screwed" stories.:D Ferd |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 527102)
It is pretty obvious that the former NW guys are very closely aligned as far as seniority and seat position goes. DAL is much less so aligned - could this be because NW's policy makes it easier to commute and thus follow the money? Is this good or bad? I guess it depends on if you commute or live in base.
Scoop Anyway, he told me that you always give up one seat when you commute. He was right, I've given up DC-9 capt and now A-320 captain (reserve) so I can be a senior 757FO and pick out more commutable schedules. Following is stolen from an American captain when I was going home once. "I play poker with card sharks, I borrow money from gangsters and commuting is still the dumbest thing I do".:D Ferd |
Following is stolen from an American captain when I was going home once. "I play poker with card sharks, I borrow money from gangsters and commuting is still the dumbest thing I do".:D
Ferd[/quote] Yes, but it would be worse to live in ATL!!:cool: |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 527118)
You have a very poor understanding of ALPA merger policy. There was never a option under the policy to vote on the SLI. It was not a choice or decision Moak had to make or offer. Not to mention that I don't think you would ever in a million years to get two groups to ratify a merged list. Lets not even go into what binding arbitration means. Take a look at past mergers in this industry. You might learn from history.
The SLI should never have gone to binding arbitration. Our ALPA reps should've been forced to negotiate something reasonable for both groups. I don't think you noticed, but the award is quite simple, relative seniority, 99.9 percent of pilots are within +-2% of their pre-merger percentage. 5-10 year fences would've prevented all this mess. Green book, red book, or whatever you want to call it would've been just fine for everybody but you, off course ;) |
Good post Barracuda. A five to ten year fence would have made this so much more liveable.
Wonder if we could vote on that now? I bet the majority would vote in favor. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 527320)
Good post Barracuda. A five to ten year fence would have made this so much more liveable.
Wonder if we could vote on that now? I bet the majority would vote in favor. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:25 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands