Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
Mergers and Acquisitions Facts, rumors, and conjecture
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-16-2008, 06:01 AM   #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CVG767A's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Position: 767ER capt
Posts: 1,190
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenmoon View Post
Other than a furlough scenarior, can someone tell me how relative seniority hurts me as a NWA guy? If I'm 10% from the top before the SLI (I wish!) and I end up 10% from the top after the SLI - how does that suck?
I agree (no surprise). The anxiety over the list revolves around career expectations; they're subject to numerous variables, many of which can't be accurately quantified or predicted. Everyone's view of the future is unique, and is colored by their own outlook on all of these variables.

We've seen this sideshow over at USAir. It would be great to avoid it here, so we could get on with taking advantage of the synergies that this merger will provide. A rising tide will lift all of our boats.

I know that doesn't answer your question; I'd like to hear a response as well. Is there a NWA guy out there that could explain how he would be hurt by relative seniority?
CVG767A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 06:07 AM   #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Skyone's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: B777 Left
Posts: 716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
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 think your friend and age numbers are wrong. I retired from Delta at age 52, I'm now 55. If I were on the senoirity list now, I would still be only around 130. The majority of pilots hired in '86-88 are probably in their early fifties but were not eligible for retirement in 2005 when the exodus was in full swing.
Skyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 06:16 AM   #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
AV8ER13's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: NWA 747-200 SO
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVG767A View Post
I'm just under #1000 at Delta, age 50, and hired in 1987.
Just to give you a heads up, Nov 85 hire at NWA is around #1450 at NWA, age 59 (planning of ret. at 60 1/2) So if I understand this correct, he would lose lots of Senority to junior DOH's at DAL?

Math=

Your 13% roughly where he is 26% roughly, so he gets Rel. Sen. merged back at 26%, he loses a lot right? If my math is right or I understand rel. sen. then I can understand why he is against this proposal.

I understand that yes he stays at 26%, but look at it from his eyes, its as if his DOH means nothing.

And Yes I undertand it from DAL side, why should you lose your current Rel. Sen. position, its a catch 22, it sucks from Both angle

...It just seems the NWA guys catch more flac for their justification in protecting their sen # then DAL does.

Last edited by AV8ER13; 04-16-2008 at 06:22 AM.
AV8ER13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 06:49 AM   #44  
Works Every Weekend
 
Check Essential's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AV8ER13 View Post
Your 13% roughly where he is 26% roughly, so he gets Rel. Sen. merged back at 26%, he loses a lot right? If my math is right or I understand rel. sen. then I can understand why he is against this proposal.
I understand that yes he stays at 26%, but look at it from his eyes, its as if his DOH means nothing.
And Yes I undertand it from DAL side, why should you lose your current Rel. Sen. position, its a catch 22, it sucks from Both angle
...It just seems the NWA guys catch more flac for their justification in protecting their sen # then DAL does.
I think sometimes people place way too much emphasis on what raw number they will be. It sounds really bad to some to be told that instead of retiring as #30 on the list you will now be topping out at #80.
What a screw job!
The fact is though, that what really matters in this profession hasn't changed in decades. Its money and quality of life. If those things improve for me as a result of a merger then I don't really care if I'm #1 or #10,000.
We each need to make an honest assessment of those factors before deciding if a proposed list is fair.
If the guy at #80 on the combined list is making lots more money and holding the same or better trips and days off than he would have at his original stand-alone carrier #30 position - Then it would be the height of folly to oppose a list based on his perceived "loss of seniority".
Check Essential is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 07:09 AM   #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NWA320pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 737 Capt
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVG767A View Post
Is there a NWA guy out there that could explain how he would be hurt by relative seniority?
Here is what I was told..... Please DO NOT take this as a bash or anti DAL its just what was stated to me.

I spoke with one of our MEC officiers yesterday on the proposals from both DAL and NWA. Here is the scenario he used to show me what DAL's last proposal would do. We have a 330 FO who is around my senority and will retire number 9 on the NWA list at age 60. Under the DAL proposal the would retire flying a 757 using the latest staffing formulas, he did not give me the senortiy # he would be.

I am not really sure where the middle ground is but I sure hope they find it. As I have stated in other posts I believe the merger will benefit us all once all the mud slining is over and we work together.

Last edited by NWA320pilot; 04-16-2008 at 07:26 AM.
NWA320pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 07:16 AM   #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CVG767A's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Position: 767ER capt
Posts: 1,190
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AV8ER13 View Post
Just to give you a heads up, Nov 85 hire at NWA is around #1450 at NWA, age 59 (planning of ret. at 60 1/2) So if I understand this correct, he would lose lots of Senority to junior DOH's at DAL?

Math=

Your 13% roughly where he is 26% roughly, so he gets Rel. Sen. merged back at 26%, he loses a lot right? If my math is right or I understand rel. sen. then I can understand why he is against this proposal.

I understand that yes he stays at 26%, but look at it from his eyes, its as if his DOH means nothing.

And Yes I undertand it from DAL side, why should you lose your current Rel. Sen. position, its a catch 22, it sucks from Both angle

...It just seems the NWA guys catch more flac for their justification in protecting their sen # then DAL does.

The answer depends on what that pilot is flying now.

What seat (block/reserve) can a pilot at the 26% point hold at NWA? The 26% point at Delta puts you in the left seat of a 767ER, flying an okay regular line (partial weekends, with okay layovers in Europe).

While it goes without saying that any pilot can hold the seat he is presently in, there may actually greater opportunities at the 26% point on a combined list, not even considering a better contract or a greater choice of domiciles.

While it may not make much of a difference to a guy retiring in 18 months, if he were to go to age 65, would he be hurt by relative seniority?
CVG767A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 07:32 AM   #47  
Line Holder
 
makoshark72's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 75/76ER FO
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
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
OK Guys...I dont post here very often but ALL TOO often I follow these posts..

My background..I'm a 52 yr old retired Navy guy, hired at NWA in 98, bottom third on the 320 FO list in MSP...

FIRST..Carl, GIVE ME A BREAK!!! You HAVE made it to the top!! To basically quote one of your early responders, you WILL NOT garner ANY sympathy from most of us rank and file guys here at NWA...I mean 52 yr old -400 Capt??? With a basically a FULL frozen pension?? C'mon! And you'll end up at 509 +/- at a 12000 pilot airline. Shoot, I wish I had your "concern"!! You are fortunate to have been hired when you did, at old (RED BOOK) NWA. I HOPE you are not one of the many at your seniority who have NO concern for us "little guys" (the Seattle 40 ...?)

Background for you DAL guys...after pension freeze in bankruptcy, ALPA negotiated a stopgap 5% company contribution to our 401k (for ALL pilots), to be renegotiated after emergence and replaced with a targeted DC plan. This was voted on and approved by the rank and file. This targeted plan took into consideration age and yrs with the company, and resulted in a complex table of annual contribution per group (age/yrs) to attempt to reach a 50% FAE of what you WOULD have received had the pension not been frozen. Example..I am 52 with 9 yrs (at the time) and I am getting about $15500 NWA contribution annually into my retirement, which aint bad at $90/hr 320 pay! Anybody who had MET that 50% with the frozen DB (ie wide body CA with 25 yrs in already, others also) receives nothing. The amount ranges from 0 to over $16k per yr, depending on age and yrs...When the targeted DC came into effect, it REPLACED the 5% stopgap. Theres a group of senior SEA guys here that actually filed suit to stop the targeted DC plan...because they no longer get the 5% that was always supposed to be temporary. They say its not fair and that 5% belongs to THEM!! GREED!

On my last trip, my CA told me of (on HIS last trip) a -400 CA jumpseater (who gets 0 targeted contribution) that got in to a "discussion" with the FO regarding his RIGHT to that 5%. The FO had been furloughed, was finally back, trying to make ends meet..his frozen DB will be around $1200/month when he retires, and he told the -400 CA jumpseater that he was really going to need that targeted DC to supplement his meager retirement. The -400 CA said "well if that $1200 isnt enough for you, you can always work part time at Walmart"...this coming from a guy with over $10k frozen retirement, and wanting his 5% on top of that. My CA said the FO nearly came out of the seat at the guy....In my 10 yrs here at NWA, this just wreaks of another example of the senior NWA guys (either color) taking care of themselves at the extreme expense of everyone else. What ever happened to a little compassion and camaraderie? At least, not in your face!!

The frozen pension isnt what we signed on for, but ask the the UAL, USAIR, or our DAL brothers about that!!!

My point (I know...finally)...the vast majority of guys I fly with want this to be worked out, are willing to "adjust" their seniority somewhat for the greater good. We dont expect either side to take it up the wazoo, and we dont expect either side to get a windfall at our brothers expense.

QUESTION....if anybody has any knowledge of what is/was on the table, where would a Oct 98 guy fall in the combined list? Rumor is that DAL wanted the bottom 900 NWA guys to be the bottom 900 on the combined list. Rumor... All i want (and my buds here at NWA) is to be blended equitably with guys of our seniority. I dont want a 2007 DAL guy above me, thats not fair, but I'm willing to give up a little for the common good.

Sorry for the long post!

Oh, and the whole DAL deal with management just smelled bad from our side, you DAL guys can probably see our point on that. Maybe in this case, smelling, looking and tasting like POO, may not necessarily mean its POO!! I sure hope not!!

AND...most importantly, if WE agree to leather jackets..PLEASE make them the ones we NWA guys have already bought. I'd hate to spend another $400!!!

Cheers!

Last edited by makoshark72; 04-16-2008 at 12:53 PM.
makoshark72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 07:56 AM   #48  
On Reserve
 
varkdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: 737NG
Posts: 19
Default

Hey Mako...nice post...as a 89 hire DAL at 53 years old...I too want a degree of fairness in this SLI...enough of the very senior side of the list making out in a large way at the expense of us knuckleheads left behind.

There is alot of new ground being ploughed in this transaction...plenty of rocks and stumps to be dislodged before a smooth road is built...we really need an honest appraisal of what took place at the table and how we get to the fair and equitable SLI. Screw the SOBs that want to pull up the ladder after all is said and done, laughing all the way to bank. We all know how this career has suffered at the hands of a myopic group of greedy "brothers"....I am for one, tired of business as usual...

If this is going to be a powerhouse airline...we better start working together and stop throwing rocks...I don't want anything getting in the way of our future prosperity. The sooner we have disclosure and honest dialogue, the better.
varkdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 08:13 AM   #49  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 72
Default

Mako, GREAT post!!

So, how do we get our MEC to tell us what the proposal was?

All the MEC is saying is "we vehemently disagree with the current proposal" or some such thing.... (DUH!)
Pitts S2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2008, 08:13 AM   #50  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 57
Default

Is it impossible for the NWA pilot group to be informed of both MEC's proposed SLI? I know that's not the norm, but it seems to me the old way hasn't worked very well. DALPA seems so sure that their SLI is a better option than any other proposed and not a winfall for any group more than the other. It seems that the NWA pilots are not getting all the info they should have. I don't beleive for one minute that age should have any bearance in the SLI. Why should anywone suffer because the other only has so many years left to fly? Heck you just got 5 more years.
flyguy1012 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:26 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright 2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1