Why DAL's proposed ratio is inequitable
 

This is my first post, as I have wanted to study the facts for a while. I am around 500 on the NWA list - hired in 1983. NWA is my 3rd airline and I've been furloughed 5 times in my career.

The reason most NWA guys could not accept the ratio proposed by DAL is quite simple. I am 52 years old and nearly everyone senior to me at NWA is older. The majority of the top 500 at DAL are in their 40's. Even if DAL's proposed ratio was one for one, that means around 500 DAL people in their 40's would be senior to me. At NWA, if I make it until 60, I retire as #9. With a one for one ratio with DAL pilots who are younger than me, the best I could hope for is retiring at #509. The same result occurs when you run this sampling back to the top 1000, top 1500, etc.

It is everyone's hope that if they make it until 60, there is a chance to make it to the top. At NWA, it was a possibility. With DAL's proposed ratio, this is an impossibility. This most unusual demographic at DAL is what makes a simple ratio inequitable.

Carl

Carl,

I can see your point. However here are some numbers for you.

I used you being 52 and expecting retirement in 2021 (age 65). I gave you the benifit of the doubt and considered any DAL pilot that should retire in 2021 senior to you. I did this because I didn't know your exact DOB.

Using this there were 242 DAL pilots that would be on the list senior to you using a relative position ratio when you retire. You would retire at 2% at the largest airline in the world.

Here's my math:

You said that you will retire 9 at NWA and I used 5150 for your pilot numbers.

I used 7330 for the number of DAL pilots. You would integrate with the 711 guy at DAL if you are 500 at NWA.

Again, I gave you all guys retiring in 2021 (above #711) being senior to you and I'm sure that if you did the same with your numbers you wouldn't be number 9 (unless you were born on Jan 1).

Summary: You lost less than 2% of your position through your retirement date because of the relative seniority position proposition. I don't see how that is too bad for you considering you are likely to be working for a more stable carrier with more routes, more aircraft and more pay.

Carl not to be mean but why does age have anything to do with it? There are guys much older working where I work and are junior to me.

Where are you finding DAL's proposal? I cannot find it anywhere.

I am not trying to start a fight at all, but does what you said really matter that much? You should still get the exact schedule you want, along with all the time off you want, in a fenced position. Isn't that right?

What about all the new hires that came to NWA because of all the retirements?

Are all the senior guys killing this deal for reasons like these?

I'm wondering where you got your data. I'm just under #1000 at Delta, age 50, and hired in 1987. I was one of the youngest in my class, as we were hiring a lot of Eastern pilots then. You're at about 10% on your list, I'm at about 13%. Our projected list has me moving to #89 by age 65 (pre-merger).

While you've obviously put more work into these calculations than I have, the numbers you come up with just don't make sense to me. I would hope that the MECs model this problem using data that both groups have verified.

As a 747 captain, you should see a QOL improvement as soon as you're under our contract; we fly our "ultra long-haul" flights with two captains and two F/Os. The number of 747 captains required will double.

Moonshot,

I don't understand your numbers, sorry. A buddy at Delta tells me that there are less than 100 guys over the age of 50. That means you have a built in demographic that is in essence a youth barrier that will be impossible to ever get past.

As stated in my first post, I don't believe that is right. If A-380's were purchased someday, someone like me could NEVER hold the airplane because my growth in seniority would be stunted by the youth barrier. This would be the case for all NWA pilots due to the Delta demographic. If so many of your 50 somethings hadn't taken the lump sum and retired early, I believe this list would be done already because the age distortion would not exist. This singular issue makes the DAL/NWA SLI a very challenging one indeed.

Carl

Carl,

I am around seniority # 2400. I will be 50 this year. The vast majority of the pilots senior to me are older. After the max exodus there was still 200+ over 50.

Yours in irrigation...;)

Pitts,

Niether side is going to publish their last proposal, so it requires some interpretation on my part. The NWA side says our last offer was a ratio that moved toward the Delta position. Delta says they offered a ratio that kept all pilots within .5% of their pre-merger relative seniority. Given these statements on both sides, I'm presuming that Date of Hire was either never offered or was quickly rejected.

With regard to your comment about there being fences, RA has publicly stated that he wants NO fences.

As I stated earlier, the age demographic affects all NWA pilots not just the senior ones. If the deal gets killed, it will be killed by all pilots not just the senior ones.

Carl

CVG and Sully,

We have quite a discrepancy in data. Sully says he is #2400 and the vast majority of pilots senior to him are over 50. The number I've heard from numerous sources is that there are less than 100 pilots at DAL over 50. A discrepancy like this should be easy to clear up. I wish I had a DAL seniority list with their respective birthdays.

Carl

Carl, I don't think a 52 year old 400 Captain 500 numbers from the top of the list is going to find any sympathy here. You've had a tough career with all those furloughs, but from where I sit you have it made, merger or no merger. I can't imagine how the merger would damage your career at this point.

My perspective... 320 FO holding a block,(just barely), hired in 99, furloughed twice, 43 years old.