Carl:
What does it matter to you? Aren't you and 1000 of your closest friends leaving?

That post looks eerily familiar. :cool:

Interesting indeed TSquare.....

I think the NOV retirement numbers will be interesting.

I think the October 29 retirement numbers will be interesting in light of DOJ approval ...

Did I say anything about the proposed DAL list? I think the DAL is closer to being fair but needs work as you have pointed out. Everyone has in their mind a list that they would like for them self but also knows what a fair list is. We just need to be a little more honest with ourselves.

The great NWA urban legend of the early retirements. Wrong. Yes we had guys leave early but the numbers were smaller NWA pilots think and also not all from the top. In addition, DAL retired L1011s, MD-11s, B767-200s, B767-300s, B727s and 737-200s during that time and that brought seat stagnation for most and furloughs to many others. It has been only recently with the new aircraft arriving that there has been seat movement. I'm still waiting for my "pot of gold" too.

50% of NWAs list is over 50 years of age, it is definitely legendary. I'm not surprised you try to minimize this....

I think he was talking about delta's early retirements a few years back...

Why do you try to make a big deal out of it? Age has never been a determinant of any kind of seniority list... has it?

Even as a Delta pilot I recognize that future retirement should play into how the list is constructed. However if that factor is used then it should be used for all the pilots on the lists today. That hurts the junior NWA pilots down the road. In addition if 50% of the NWA list is over 50 which I suspect is correct then that is about 2650 pilots. Delta has 2000 pilots over 50 so the retirement will not have the differential some believe.

2000 is a big number but that is still less than 1/3 or your pilot group? You would still need another 1500 to retire to get to 50%.

Yes it has. Because age is a major determinant of retirement. ;)

And retirements are one of the many things used by the arbitrators to determine what they feel is the long term fairness of any SLI formulation.

Carl

It most certainly is and has been - look at the SLI treatment of EEOC hires at NWA and elsewhere.

Welcome back Carl,---my now official fellow Delta pilot. I underline retirements....one of..many things because that is undoubtedly true. NW's proposal, though, treats retirement as if it were the only thing the arbitrators should consider. I believe there are a few concepts considered by arbitrators that "trump" any "future expectations" formulation...the most obvious priority concept being summed up as: "preserving current seniority". Your proposal doesn't even come close... the fences attempt to preserve DL's current seniority "rights" for 10 yrs. (and they don't come close, especially as evidenced on the 767ER/767-300/757 fence, and the allocations for future 777 deliveries) Now "seniority" and "seniority rights" are way different, specifically, when it comes to making predictions, which, as we all know, is notoriously difficult..(especially about the future.;)) A relative list will preserve current seniority for both groups, and within that framework we can find some way to address retirement attrition at NW. To attempt to do air-tight DOH fences covering every contingency of the future invites constant conflict between the two groups, on a scale that would make your red/green book problems pale in comparison. The airline will change dramatically in the future and we already have indications of this in the short-term. If your retirements are so concrete and quantifiable, we should be able to deal with them in a concrete and quantifiable manner, and not subject 98% of the DL pilots to the jeopardy and "promises" of the future that your proposal entails.

Sorry tsquare. Didn't mean to steal your quote, but amazangly, carl can't/won't answer the question. hmmmmmm..................

Then why aren't we ordered by age?

Retirements might be considered by arbitrators... they may very will be, but hopefully not that mythical 62.4 years your lawyer came up with. Unless you are willing to sign your retirement paperwork right now stating that you are gone in another 12 years... 62.4 is meaningless. 65 is the only number that is concrete and is (hopefully) considered.

Must be nice to be you though... 13 more years as a whale captain... if they are around that long. But damn... you might have to stoop to a 777. I'm guessing your career has sucked so far hasn't it?

But anyway... all bickering aside... welcome aboard

[quote=wiggy;488728]Welcome back Carl,---my now official fellow Delta pilot.

I second that - Welcome aboard Carl!


when it comes to making predictions, which, as we all know, is notoriously difficult..(especially about the future.;))

Do I detect a Yogi Berra paraphrase?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Scoop

[quote=Scoop;488780]Ahhhh....Yogi. DAL and NWA came to a fork in the road.......and they took it!

OK, here's the way I think it will go. Delta pilots have earned their seniority seats, pay and progression, NWA pilots the same. That will create a list more akin to the Delta proposal due to the top heavy NWA list. NWA pilots will dominate the top of the seniority list in positions that are already the end of their progression, then Delta widwbody Captains that may or may not be at the end of progression. A free for all in the narrow body playing field, and the junior most guys at both are not going to like it. I don't think economy of scale plays well with Robert's Award type fences. Bottom line, if you are in the seat you desire, you'll be moderately PO'd. If you aren't you'll be REALLY PO'd. To the respective MEC's, Get on with it!

[quote=Scoop;488780]OK Scoop, since you started the thread hijack, my favorite Yogi line was in regard to his favorite restaurant in New York. When asked about it by a sports reporter he said: "Oh nobody goes there anymore...it's too crowded.

Carl

Yeah, I'm really bad about answering questions. Here's tsquare's post:

Here's my repsonse:

Carl - the question dodger.

That's not true. The NWA proposal preserves the seniority of NWA pilots. THAT is how it accounts for NWA pilots receiving credit for NWA retirements.

The DOH proposal preserves NWA seniority, the 10 fence ensures that NWA pilots cannot use their seniority against DAL pilots. Your characterization of our proposal would be correct if it didn't include the 10 year fence. That is added to preserve DAL seniority.

You're correct about that. It's one of the weaknesses in our proposal and must be fixed.

Credit for future allocations ain't gonna happen in my opinion. Chairman Bloch's "roulette wheel" comment ended the concept of crediting anyone's future options. It may have ended credit for future firm orders as well.

No it doesn't. As our testimony clearly showed with that slide show moving forward in one year increments. NWA guys in red and DAL guys in blue. Under the DAL plan, every year NWA guys vanish from the top until after 10 years when virtually no NWA pilot occupies the top 2000 positions. THAT is the weakness in the DAL proposal in my opinion, and the single most devastating piece of evidence against it. After the 5 year freeze is up, a wholesale transfer of jobs from former NWA to former DAL would begin.

As I've said earlier - as horrified as NWA pilots were to watch their relative positions fall by 20% plus when the arbitrators chose straight DOH, the 20 year fence protected the NWA jobs. It actually worked pretty well. I can tell you that you haven't seen conflict like you would see if the DAL proposal were adopted. No pilot group would be wanting to sing songs around a camp fire when DAL occupies the top and NWA occupies the bottom.

They are concrete, and DOH is the best way to get credit for them. A 10 year fence is the best way for DAL pilots to preserve their seniority until the older NWA guys (me included) are gone.

Carl

If you guys listen to one thing, you should listen to this point: 62.4 years is a statistically accurate determination of the average age that a pilot will separate from service. Whether by the pilot's choice or nature's choice, you are statistically gone by age 62.4. But let's not quibble about 2.6 years. Just add 2.6 years to the fences, and DAL pilots are even more protected against NWA using their seniority. When you run our proposal forward in one year increments, there are no spots where one color rules the roost except for the first 2 years. After that, there is a clear balance of DAL/NWA guys throughout the list in its entirety.

I'd sign them right now. With regard to 65 being the only concrete number, see above.

There's no way I could go 13 more years, my health won't hold out. And no, my career hasn't sucked. DAL is my fourth airline and I've been furloughed 5 times, but it's been a worthwhile journey.

Carl

Carl, I have a lot of friends at NWA. They paint a different picture then you do. One thing you have to remember is that the Delta contract rewards being senior in category. I can hold a line as a 777 Captain at either base as a 86 hire. I have not bid it because I want to be in the top 1/3. Since your fence does not exclude future 777's I will not reach that point ever in my career under the NWA list. As has happened at NW with the fence those that cross the fence via new deliveries or forced displacement will all be senior. I am told that your 747-400 list has mostly green book pilots in the top 1/3. I should be in the top 1/3 in NYC in the next bid and should be there in Atlanta within 2 years. I don't just want my current position protected I want my future advancement protected. Its very difficult to construct fences that accomplish that. In addition if there is going to be a fence because of the NWA retirement the fence should also reflect the Delta retirements. That means a 15 to 20 year fence. That really hammers your junior guys as your MEC found out when they made a SLI proposal without doing their homework. The most critical thing however about the NWA fence is it does not include the 7ER category which like it or not will make up half the international flying at the new company.

You absolutely will reach that point on the 777. Under the NWA proposal, NWA pilots couldn't bid the 777 for 10 years. By that time, there probably won't be a single NWA pilot around who is senior to you. Thus your only competition for the top spot in category, will be other DAL pilots.

Yes, new deliveries of 777's beyond what is on firm order would be shared. And yes those NWA pilots would probably be senior to you, but that does NOT include a forced displacement. If any NWA guy is forced displaced, they can only displace to another NWA pre-merger aircraft. If we buy new 747-400's, the DAL guys that bid it would probably be senior to me. I don't think an arbitrator will spend very much brain cell activity on ensuring that very senior people only go up in their category. There are just too many other big picture items to solve.

Again, your only competition for 10 years will be DAL guys. After 10 years, there just aren't very many senior NWA guys left.

If that's what it takes to ensure that DAL pilot's seniority is protected, that's OK with me.

Pure BS. You have no evidence of that whatsoever. Our guys have always said that the reason they walked away from that first proposal is because DAL wanted to count aircraft options for themselves, and NOT count firm orders for NWA. They had no choice but to walk away. And by the way, a DOH list with a 20 year fence would not hammer our junior guys at all. The DAL proposal that puts 400+ at the bottom...would.

As I've said earlier, that is a correct statement. That inequity must/will be solved.

Carl

Carl, The problem with the 777 issue is that what is a new order. Delta because they are Boeings largest customer got a excellent deal on the 777's. They have 45 delivery positions through 2014. These positions are not firm orders however are not a traditional option either. 18 months prior to each positions delivery date Delta can affirm or cancel the order. Very flexible and until Americans 787 order last week unique in the industry. It is those future 777's that will allow me to fly as a senior 777 CA in Atlanta. That will not happen with a DOH list under the NWA list. In fact if I bid the aircraft now I would go backward as more aircraft were added until at some point I would end up on reserve. You state that additional 777's would be shared. That is not what would happen virtually every 777 seat awarded after the 2 aircraft in 1Q10 would go to NWA. There would be no sharing. I do allow and agree that the Delta list does not address the higher retirements at NWA. I don't think however going from 9% on my current list to 22% on the new list is fair. Hopefully the arbitrators will see it the same.

sailingfun,

But is it fair for a NWA 96 hire to go behind a DAL 2000 hire? Under your proposal I would go from a 330 FO back to either an 319/320 FO or 73 fo. And even though I would end in the top 100 at NWA I would never crack the top 1500 under the DAL lists. So, the word 'fair' can be used by many.

When Chairman Bloch made his "roulette wheel" statement, I believe he was talking about this type of expectation - among others. Just the same as if I were to say that all our 787 options will allow me to fly as a senior 787 CA. I think the arbitrators made it about as clear as I have ever heard (prior to an award), this level of protection for pilots (especially senior ones) can't be predicted, and as such, ain't gonna happen.

Carl

Well Carl with the NWA list and restrictions there is one thing that is certain. Virtually every widebody seat after the 2 777's in 1Q10 would go only to NWA pilots for many years to come. I would call that a big windfall.

A 2000 hire at Delta can hold 777 copilot. He can do very well on the 767ER. I suspect like a 2000 hire at Delta you would not hold 330 FO on a stove piped list. You are holding it out of seniority just as the 777 FO above would. You can't compare what you hold now to what you would hold on a stove piped list. You have to compare apples to apples. If once a list was rationalized you could show you can't hold equal equipment then I agree it would not be fare. Also keep in mind that every NWA pilot will enjoy higher pay and seat progression over time because Delta brought a much larger average fleet size to the overall mix.

Sailing,

IMO doing the category list (stove piped) like you guys propose is where the whole ratio thing breaks down. I agree that a pure DOH list is unfair to you guys, (yes I would love it), but your attempt to "rationalize" the list drops me 4% vs my current NWA list. I'm just under half way up as a 9/95 hire and the percentage gets worse as you go towards the bottom of the stovepipe, to the point you run out of premerger Delta guys and 404 exNWA guys are at the bottom.

Lots of problems with a pure DOH list including bad year group management, ie you hired when we didn't and vise versa (I call it a saw tooth list) but of the two I would argue that DOH is "cleaner" than the stove pipe.

Good discussion, don't ya wish we could be flies on the wall and hear the pros discuss this? What ya wanna bet we are close to their arguments......and why we're still fighting about this 7 months later.

Hope to see ya in NRT sometime your 777 dudeness!

Ferd

The way I see it, the final outcome will not go far enough for some NWers, and will go too far for some Dlers with respect to fences and or closer DOHs, ( not a straight DOH list though.) My personal plan is to drink large amounts of beer, followed by putting my fingers in my ears and saying, "LA LA LA LA I CAN"T HEAR YOU!" whenever anybody starts to complain how they got screwed on the SLI, regardless of which side they originally came from.:cool:

What an excellent plan. Especially that beer part.

Carl

Is it possible, Carl, that some of those "among others" you cite with Bloch's "roulette wheel" statement just as likely refer to expectations of future advancement due to retirements? IOW, a mid seniority NW pilot claiming: "All the NW retirements will allow me to be very senior in 5-7-10 years". You would be hard-pressed to justify a negative answer to that question. On a more general note, I can tell you that 210 DL pilots in the top 1400 positions simply will not "fly". And I find it hard to believe 2 of 3 arbitrators would disagree, given the uncertainties of the future of this industry. Now, we can speculate on the gargantuan and detailed fences that you might think would assuage our concerns, but they won't, DL brings 1100 senior international widebody captain positions to the merger, NW brings 500. 210 of 1400 is extreme, to put it mildly, regardless of what your blue and red charts show. DL has not put on their rebuttal case yet, (and they have full access to all the details of the NW proposal, and I don't) I would imagine they will find many uncontemplated (by us) faults w/NW's proposal. Speculating on ever-increasing-in-complexity DOH fences, (which ultimately leads to an actual non-merger of pilot groups, to keep everyone safe) is futile. The final solution, whether negotiated or arbitrated, will expose both pilot groups equally to those "vagaries of the future". DOH w/fences does not expose both groups equally to that risk.

Sailing,
I guess I just don't understand why we can't find somewhere in the middle,like splitting the difference between DOH and Relative Seniority. Then we'd both be equally ****ed/happy pending one's disposition. I don't know what DALPA is thinking but I hope it doesn't go to arbitration not because I do not believe our guys didn't make great arguments, with Blouch stating that we are equals, but rather for the harmony of the next 20 years it really would not be good for either group to outright win. I.E I don't want date of hire (don't shoot me fellow NWAers) because the disharmony and ill will that would cause for the next upteen years and the same argument goes for relative seniority.

I do hope calmer heads will prevail and the two sides will just split their differences in half and then we can ***** about it over beers in AMS or CDG or NRT. I'll buy the first round.

The DL argument now is relative seniority by equipment with the DC-9s in a separate category at the bottom. Widebody, narrowbody, DC-9. DL has the large majority of the large aircraft so that plan puts a larger number of DL guys near the top. Straight relative seniority would be in the middle of DOH and relative seniority by equipment.

Okay, if that's what you want to believe then okay! But, no matter how you run the numbers I lose 1700 numbers by the DAL proposal and that is not the middle of the road by any means. If DAL is going to hold on to relative seniority argument and not move from that position then the SLI will end up in the hands of the arbitraitors and then come what may. The NWA side feels that they have a solid argument as does the DAL guys however, my point being, is that for either side to outright win would be a loss for both sides as we would have disharmony and ill will for years to come. My proposal was that we find middle ground between Relative Seniority and Date of Hire not the DAl version that relative seniority is the middle ground. For that matter if Relative Seniority is the middle ground for DALPA what then is the real DAL list. Staple?

Opus, I suspect hawaii's statement that DL's position is now staight relative (vs. status and category) seniority is his guess or opinion of a plausible DL position in the negotiations. But if that were true, it would represent a movement toward compromise on the part of DL. I have yet to hear of any compromise (rumored, speculated, guessed, or opined) on the NW side, have you heard of any? --not trying to stir anything up here, just wondering if there are any rumors, etc. on your side.

I think you missed my point. I'm not really making a value judgment on either proposal. My point was that the current DL position is not relative seniority, it's relative seniority by equipment broken into 3 categories which skews the top of the list toward the group with the larger equipment and skews the bottom guys to NWA because the proposal puts the DC-9 in it's own category at the bottom. You would have to come out much better with just a straight relative seniority plan. Straight relative seniority would have you at the same position on the combined list as you are on your list now, ie your 75% down the list now and you end up 75% down the combined list.