I'm in favor of cage fighting style. We'll call it "Thunderdome Intigration" first guy out is last on the list.

 

Swimming in the pool at LUV? Better have a pair of these. Speaking of lollipops and unicorns... Things at LUV don't appear to be much better than the rest of the industry. It also has issues wth FAA Fines for hiding "SERIOUS" problems with its maintenance program and some problems keeping the skin attached to the fuselage as of late.

But yet you say they are profitable. Seems to not be case all the time. Also what about the schedule reductions and reductions in ASM's . Like most carriers there is not a lot of good news in the 10-Q.

Glad to hear you are going to work at bullet proof company. Nothing will ever go wrong. Now when do you start class?

One other thing. What type of debt did you incur to buy your job at your current company and then go buy your job at LUV? Aren't they the only "major" carrier that requires you to pay for your own training? Here is the rub. You put out some information on this board that you cast as the gospel of all things financial. Yet, not sure about your own financial prowess. If you don't get going on that career at WN soon, doesn't that put a dent into the return on investment of paying for your own 737 training? With WN losing in DEN and reducing ASM's system wide, no retirements for three more years you might want to dust off the HP 10bll
to refine that yacht purchase prediction.

Yes your WN career may be a dream job. A pipe dream at this rate. You can make the case from the F9 debacle that SWAPA was looking for some furlough fodder for its own pilots. It will be interesting to watch.

 

Could have said that about Delta in the early 90's just before their first furlough. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Also, a quick check of Luv's financials shows losses in 3 of the last 4 quarters. Hope you like the right seat.

 

No.

The reason being that DOB causes a lot of seniority shuffling and erases a lot of expectations. When we were all hired at our respective airlines we could look to our retirement date and see how we would end up in seniority--career expectations. The most fair way is to use relative seniority so that we all end up fairly close to that original expectation. DOB and staple are pretty selfish ways of integration (selfish only if you qualify for senior discounts or are the stapler). IMO

 

JSLED, is it just me or does anyone else see the irony in the SWA poolie trying to lecture the world on how to integrate a seniority list? What was the hot topic a week ago? SWAPA and the Staple job they were trying to pull. This poor kid's father has wasted a fortune on him and his "career".

 

Quan,

Please give me your definition of "relative seniority". As with most debates, you will find there are 20 different interpretations of the same seemingly simple phrase. Thanks in advance.

 

I can only begin to tell you how many people I fly with whose airline pilot career "expectations" have been dashed on the rocks of this post deregulation industry... many, more than once. Here's a better question: "Does a merger increase or decrease one's career expectations?"

By the way, the date of birth idea, was only my lame attempt at a funny. I was hired at 22 by the same major I work for now 20+ years ago. 10 years of seniority went by until there was anyone younger than myself on our list. I can look at projections for retirement and rest comfortably knowing that I will be well inside of 500 for at least 15 years and retire either number 2, or with a little foul play, number 1. There I go again trying to be funny. Seems I'll never learn.

 

If your airline merged with another wouldn't you have the expectation of still retiring near that #2 spot? Basically your in the top 1%. So if you merge and still retire within the top 3% would you really be pi$$ed if you retired at #5...#1? With a bigger seniority list is there really a difference b/n 1 and 10 even?
Sorry, I missed your smilie.

 

Actually my expectation would be to get hosed in a CAL/UAL merger. Why? The huge demographic bubble in the CAL seniority list due to the strike breaking scabs and the younger pilots that returned under order and award. The age 65 rule change delayed the exodus of that bubble of pilots that are predominantly 57-63 years old. This affects all CAL pilot way more than UAL pilots, especially if a merger occurs in the next 4 years. When you compare the more linear age/seniority relationship in the top half of UAL's list, CAL is top heavy. The screaming hard lobbying "relative seat position" advocates at UAL stand to gain 10 years on most CAL pilots because of the bubble. Many of the more junior CAL pilots fail to understand how the call for a shift in long standing ALPA merger policy away from career expectation, toward more consideration to relative position would harm them.

 

This might be true but it's still nothing compared to the likes of DAL/NWA and AMR. CAL's fleet is the most efficient of all the majors. They're just getting screwed because they're operating on old hedges that cost them an arm and a leg each month. If DC-9s are still flying around I think CAL's in great shape frame wise.