Delta to stand alone?
02-27-2008, 03:38 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 7ER B
Posts: 145
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
Your relative seniority proposal sounds okay to me as long as it doesn't put any post 9/11 hires in front of any pre 9/11 hires. That might not be completely rational, but it's a deal breaker for me.
slinky
02-27-2008, 03:45 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by Justdoinmyjob
That's what happens when you believe everything you hear on the line. I stand corrected. You are right. I looked at the numbers from the projected category list and a 01/97 hire date gets you plug in LAX on the 76 domestic. It also gets you 73N in ATL and 11/97 gets you 73N in NYC. The most junior captain is M88 in NYC with a 7/00 date.
But it is not so good as urban legend would have you believe.
02-27-2008, 04:59 AM
#33
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by sully606
To add to Herk's comments I made captain at 14 years. It could of been earlier but it would have been miserable with a young family etc.
I'm at 18 years now and a junior reserve ER captain. I'm in this position way out of seniority because many pilots aren't willing to put up with reserve and NYC.
I'm not complaining. I'm glad to be here and am fortunate that things have turned out as they have (so far). The mass exodus of senior Delta pilots due to impending bankruptcy and the ability to take a 50% lump sum with our loss of the DB plan ( I know we got something for the loss but I wasn't made whole) caused this movement and now I'm supposed to give this to someone else who at least got their DB plan hard frozen.
I'm at 18 years now and a junior reserve ER captain. I'm in this position way out of seniority because many pilots aren't willing to put up with reserve and NYC.
I'm not complaining. I'm glad to be here and am fortunate that things have turned out as they have (so far). The mass exodus of senior Delta pilots due to impending bankruptcy and the ability to take a 50% lump sum with our loss of the DB plan ( I know we got something for the loss but I wasn't made whole) caused this movement and now I'm supposed to give this to someone else who at least got their DB plan hard frozen.
02-27-2008, 05:02 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
I don't have any details about the agreements being proposed. I'm just looking at the items that have been leaked to the press. Most of what I've read blames the NWA pilots for delaying the merger, therefore, it seems like the leaks are designed to put pressure on the NWA pilots. DAL guys might not be used to this, but NWA guys have been getting this kind of treatment from our management for a long time, so we recognize the intent of the press leaks pretty quickly. The people in MSP writing these articles are very connected to NWA managment. I don't think they do any independent research, they just regurgitate whatever their NWA contacts tell them. Then the wire services pick up the story and take it national and suddenly it's the gospel truth.
The leaks are already creating dissention among the employees. Flight attendants are yelling at pilots for "holding up the deal." Senior pilots are touting the monetary improvements in the contract in an effort to sell the deal without the seniority integration piece. They know they are safe anyway and just want the extra money.
Your relative seniority proposal sounds okay to me as long as it doesn't put any post 9/11 hires in front of any pre 9/11 hires. That might not be completely rational, but it's a deal breaker for me.
The leaks are already creating dissention among the employees. Flight attendants are yelling at pilots for "holding up the deal." Senior pilots are touting the monetary improvements in the contract in an effort to sell the deal without the seniority integration piece. They know they are safe anyway and just want the extra money.
Your relative seniority proposal sounds okay to me as long as it doesn't put any post 9/11 hires in front of any pre 9/11 hires. That might not be completely rational, but it's a deal breaker for me.
would that philosophy work if american and continental merged?
are you worried that a delta new hire would be put in front of you because they have hired more than nwa and lowering your relative seniority? would you be for it if nwa new hires were put in front of some of delta's pre 9-11 hires. nwa has more senior pilots so the junior/newhire believe they should get something for that.
02-27-2008, 05:17 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by slinky
As a Newhire at Delta, last summer, I would think that pretty dumb also. The Newhires at both companies should just be DOH.
slinky
slinky
would delta have even been hiring if the top pilots didn't jump ship before the bankrupcy?
02-27-2008, 05:19 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B747FO
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
Looks like I posted with a bit more "hostile" tone than I intended. Sorry about that! The bottom line is that DAL has had good movement the past few years, mostly due to the massive early retirement a couple of years ago.
But it is not so good as urban legend would have you believe.
But it is not so good as urban legend would have you believe.
Thanks for the realistic info on your seniority. The urban legends has us all guessing.
02-27-2008, 05:38 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 403
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
Your relative seniority proposal sounds okay to me as long as it doesn't put any post 9/11 hires in front of any pre 9/11 hires. That might not be completely rational, but it's a deal breaker for me.
In this argument, you could be, say ~90 percent seniority at NWA. If you do merge with Delta, you demand at least, lets say ~80 percent seniority at the merged company if the highest post 9/11 Delta hire is at 81%.
That's ridiculous, and your right, not rational.
We're all very sorry 9/11 affected this industry so much, but guess what, that doesn't mean you have to take it out on the people who got hired post 9/11.
Remember, you may have been furloughed and cut wages for 5-6 years, but there are other people out there who were unable to get hired for 5-6 years too since NWA and Delta weren't hiring. So don't try and make the guys who hadn't been hired yet take it in the rear again just because they were hired at another carrier. Everyone was affected by 9/11; not just young guys at the airlines, but regional guys, military guys all around were affected.
02-27-2008, 05:40 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 403
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
As far as I am concerned every new hire should be behind anyone that had to endure the pitfalls of post 9/11.
That is fair.
That is fair.
See my above post.
Newsflash Einstein: We were all hurt by 9/11, not just you...
02-27-2008, 05:51 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
As far as I am concerned every new hire should be behind anyone that had to endure the pitfalls of post 9/11.
That is fair.
That is fair.
I don't know about nwa furloughs but I heard that delta furloughs got longevity in pay. when they came back they came back at 6th year pay not 1st. if that is the case I would make the argument that delta/nwa new hires are still feeling the affects of 9/11 more so than the furloughs because they didn't get longevity like them.
I would bet that everyone endured the affects of 911 unless you might be like superpilot who let everyone know that he is like 18 and the youngest guy in his class...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
