![]() |
Originally Posted by RemoveB4flght
(Post 3690674)
Larger, stronger companies that can afford more pro business lobbyists are more of a threat than potential lost tax revenue, not to mention larger strong unions that historically have not be pro big government…
|
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 3690785)
I bet you're the smartest guy in every room.
|
Originally Posted by RemoveB4flght
(Post 3690894)
Depends if you and I are alone in a room.
|
So will the LOA help with the SLI at all? Does the higher wages/401k/etc increase the pilot groups leverage for SLI mediation? Or is it basically a wash?
|
Originally Posted by Tornado875
(Post 3708569)
So will the LOA help with the SLI at all? Does the higher wages/401k/etc increase the pilot groups leverage for SLI mediation? Or is it basically a wash?
|
Originally Posted by Tornado875
(Post 3708569)
So will the LOA help with the SLI at all? Does the higher wages/401k/etc increase the pilot groups leverage for SLI mediation? Or is it basically a wash?
The ALPA manual says: Seniority List Integration (SLI): Section 45 of the ALPA Administrative Manual sets forth the procedures for integrating pilot seniority lists when two or more ALPA carriers merge. Under ALPA policy, the SLI process should not begin until there is a ratified Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement. At that point, policy provides that the MEC Merger Committees first attempt to negotiate an agreement on a fair and equitable single seniority list. According to ALPA policy, construction of a fair and equitable seniority list should take into account career expectations, longevity, and status and category. If the Merger Committees are unable to construct a single list based on these principles on their own, then the issue is submitted to mediation and, failing that, mandatory arbitration before a three-member board. |
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just saw the email from the MEC saying the DOT may now also be joining the fight against this merger? I just don't understand any of the logic behind this. The reason was for not being "in the public interest". I guess facebook, twitter, comcast and other mega corporations who continue to just buy up the competitor is totally fine for the public, but 2 small airlines is crossing the line. What a joke.
|
Originally Posted by AYLflyer
(Post 3708727)
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just saw the email from the MEC saying the DOT may now also be joining the fight against this merger? I just don't understand any of the logic behind this. The reason was for not being "in the public interest". I guess facebook, twitter, comcast and other mega corporations who continue to just buy up the competitor is totally fine for the public, but 2 small airlines is crossing the line. What a joke.
they think that if the merger goes through nobody will be able to beat up gate agents anymore. |
Originally Posted by AYLflyer
(Post 3708727)
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just saw the email from the MEC saying the DOT may now also be joining the fight against this merger? I just don't understand any of the logic behind this. The reason was for not being "in the public interest". I guess facebook, twitter, comcast and other mega corporations who continue to just buy up the competitor is totally fine for the public, but 2 small airlines is crossing the line. What a joke.
But, in this case they have it all wrong. They created a monster by allowing only 4 companies to control 80% of the domestic market. And when you consider how big our country is, and how many individual large metro markets are actually monopolized by just ONE company, they only have two choices to correct the situation previous governments have allowed. Either break up all four of the large airlines, or allow consolation to create a #5 and probably a #6 large carrier. Simply having more small airlines isn't good enough. They don't have the network breadth, network depth, or financial strength to compete with four monsters. Not effectively anyway. And the nature of airlinering allows for big airlines to double capacity and drop fares to below cost on the few (relative) markets the small airlines fly, because they can make up for those losses in all the other markets they have near monopolies on. I believe the judge will see this, see that a larger JB ultimately helps far more consumers nationwide than it may hurt in the few routes/markets JB/NK compete on, and in addition there really isn't precedent for blocking an airline merger of this nature/scale. |
Originally Posted by AYLflyer
(Post 3708727)
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just saw the email from the MEC saying the DOT may now also be joining the fight against this merger? I just don't understand any of the logic behind this. The reason was for not being "in the public interest". I guess facebook, twitter, comcast and other mega corporations who continue to just buy up the competitor is totally fine for the public, but 2 small airlines is crossing the line. What a joke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI6CzBXFsUo 1:06:34 into it |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:33 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands