NWA fence proposal
 

So it sounds like the NWA guys want a 10 year fence to give them the benefit of their "exceptional" attrition. It's funny how the fence stops when their retirements slow down and the Delta retirements get bigger. They want the benefit of their near term retirements to only go to them and then they also want the benefit of the large Delta retirements in 10 years to go to them. If we are going that way we need to have 35year fences.

blah blah blah blah

Dave Stevens, is that you?

As long as they fence the bottom so they can reap their aircraft retirements also, the 10 year fence is fine with me.

do you think delta would just shrink or farm out that flying to the regionals?

What ? ? ?

new scope caps the regionals off and DAL has already announced over 100+ "RJs" will be parked in the near future.

satchip thinks the nwa planes will be parked and whats to protect the delta pilots. I was wondering if he thinks the airline will replace them with mainline aircraft, regional aircraft or just parked w/o a replacement.

isn't nwa only asking for a partial fence for their "exceptional" attrition seen as no one has to retire for another 4 years. essentially the fence is for only 6 real years of retirement between both companies and nwa's retirements are to last from years 5-15. (age 65)

Its a fence, not dynamic seniority. The retirements would benefit both sides because both sides move up a number every time someone retires. Only those specific positions would be fenced. Therefore any guys at DAL that are below a "senior" NWA pilot wouldn't be effected by those that are technically above them on the list.

If there were fences, how does that work for new-hires after the DCC? Are the fences only on senior aircraft that a new-hire wouldn't be able to hold in a short time anyway? Can someone explain how the fences work, please.

You can read them for yourself if you have access to either side's SLI proposal. The Conditions and Restrictions (commonly known as fences) apply only to those pilots hired prior to the date of constructive notice - which in our case is April 14, 2008. Any pilot hired after that will not have any of the fence protections.

Carl

Whoops...spoke too soon. What I've outlined above is only in the NWA SLI proposal. The DAL SLI proposal doesn't distinguish between pilots hired before or after constructive notice. It just discusses pilots from each group's pre-merger seniority list.

Dont' mean to start a war, but that is a weak spot in the DAL SLI fences. I don't know of any merger where the arbitrator didn't treat post constructive notice pilots differently than pre constructive notice. In the DAL SLI proposal, some post constructive notice DAL pilots are senior to NWA pre constructive notice pilots. If the arbitrators agreed to that, I think it would be the first time.

In the DAL SLI, the bottom 402 pilots are NWA pilots. Because of that, a DAL pilot that would not yet have been offered a class date at DAL at the time of constructive notice, is senior to an NWA pilot who was hired in the year 2000.

Carl

Wait a sec... You are saying that the last two classes hired at DAL (4/21/08 and 5/5/08) are not privy to any fences? These pilots were offered, signed letters of employment from DAL well in advance of any merger announcement on April 14, 2008.

You NWA guys amaze me... You have had no problem screwing over the Republic guys, but heaven forbid something happen to you. Now you think current DAL pilots are less equal than other DAL other pilots on the same list... ??

I don't know of any merger where the arbitrator determined a list in advance of Date of Corp Closure. I think this whole process is a first time.

I think that since both pilot groups/ airlines stopped hiring about the same time, it will probably include everyone.

The fences proposed by NWA protect all Captain Seats and widebody FO seats, they do not apply to any narrowbody FO seats. They calculated a number of protected seats* for each jet and came up with a number. Any seats beyond that number (i.e. growth) get shared 1:1. There is an "insufficient bidder" clause that will give that seat a pre-merger pilot from the "other side" if there aren't enough bidders from the protected side. I'm probably over-simplifying it. If you have access to the transcripts I highly recommend you read them.

* the methodology for calculating the number of protected seats is tremendously different between the DAL proposal and the NWA proposal.

When you say things like this, you only display your ignorance of history. I would explain it (again), but I'd like to avoid the responses of: "Shut up Carl, nobody here cares about ancient history."

Carl

Is the 767ER a widebody in the NWA proposal? Or is it just super premium widebody FO seats that are fenced? BTW, love that avatar, where did you find it?

The 767-400 and 777 are the only DAL FO seats that are protected in the NWA proposal, so yeah, I guess that's what we're calling super extra premium. I hope we never get A380's.

Yeah, I need to get a little more creative with the avatar.

Does anything change with the fences if airplanes start moving all around?

For example, if delta decides to swap nwa's seattle a330 flying with delta nyc 767 flying? could nwa's proposal essentially close the seattle base for them?

I'm guessing here, but the seat protection goes with the seat, wherever it moves to.

So DAL proposed the 1,000 phantom pilots and the not-so-equitable ratio. NWA proposed DOH and a fence. Either side obviously sees the other as extreme so where is middle? A real ratio with no 1,000 phantom pilots and a dynamic seniority list. That's my bet, in the middle.

DAL, did you guys come up with 1,000 phantom pilots on your own, or does someone really dig sci-fi?

Those would be the pilots flying the phantom 787. :) Or perhaps the Mesaba flow up guys who did not start at NW yet - relax only kidding. Seriously though, the only time I have ever heard of Phantom pilots is on this message board by NW guys. I reviewed most of the transcripts and never saw a reference to anything close to that. It is the Halloween season so Phantoms are a definite possiblity. :eek:

I think the arbitrators will rule in between the two proposals if we can not agree on a list ourselves - its what arbitrators do. It was even on Seinfeld - remember when Newman ordered Elaine and Kramer to "cut the bike in half."
Scoop

Carl
About Fences are they really all that good if we go back in History did not NWA pilots loose some with Republic Boston base getting smaller and Republic pilots going to MSP from there and bumping NWA pilots out of MSP?

Fences aren't great, but both proposals have them for a reason. It's the only way to protect pre-merger status. If there's a better way, maybe the arbitrators will find it.

Carl

Keep in mind that management doesn't want fences and from my understanding, does not have to accept any arbitration which has fences in it.

Not correct.

Nu

Does this SLI make anyone else feel like a bartender getting the leftovers at the bar at the end of the night?

Sure your gonna get laid, but no matter what you probably won't enjoy it and regardless, your gonna wake up in bed together.

Where does it say that management has to accept the outcome of this unconditionally? It is only binding on the pilots, not management.

You say "Not correct," yet offer no proof to back up your claim. I said it was "my understanding," that the company doesn't have to accept the list, and that understanding is based on this excerpt from an DALPA FAQ doc:

3. What is the role of the company in seniority integration? Can the company unilaterally implement its own list? Must the company approve any integrated list the union develops?

The company cannot unilaterally implement an integrated seniority list (see Section 1.D.8 of the PWA). Under the PWA, however, an integrated seniority list developed by ALPA must be submitted to the Company for its approval. Section 1.D.8.b. of the PWA contains specific timelines and procedures for the company to accept ALPA’s integrated list or, in the absence of such acceptance, for potential arbitration between ALPA and the company for selecting between a merged list proposed by ALPA or one proposed by the company. The ALPA/NWA agreement, however, does not provide for this type of dispute resolution between ALPA and the company, so these conflicting terms between the agreements may need to be resolved in the negotiation of transition terms.


What I get out of this is that they do not have to unilaterally accept the list "As Is."
The last sentance seems to suggest that once we finish with the SLI, then round 2 starts with the company should they find any aspects of the SLI (re fences) unacceptable.

Or can you provide information that shows differently.

Jdmj-
You are correct. Section 1D8 of the contract applies.
However, you can bet that management will be very reluctant to get in the middle of this.

That said, they might dispute any conditions, restrictions or fences that significantly impacted their operational flexibility. They have that power. If they do object, then ALPA has a choice - resubmit a "modified" list without the fences that the company doesn't like or hand it to another arbitrator. This time it would be "baseball style". The arbitrator has to pick the company's list or ALPA's list.

Fences cost money. When we submit our list, the company has to decide if they will pay that cost or not. If the fences are long and tall enough, they might object.

Thats why NWA's proposed 10 year fence is ridiculous and totally unrealistic. As I said previously, any SLI proposal that contains 10 yr. fences illustrates how indefenseable it is on its own merits and clearly something that Delta would reject outright. Try again NWA

I was thinking about this, and I have to disagree. I don't think any fences will restrict the movement of aircraft, and that is all the company cares about.

A fence that says, for example, only a NWA pilot can fly a 330 for the next 10 years has zero cost to the company. If they want to move the 330 to ATL (again for example) then they post a bid and the senior most NWA pilots who bid it get it. Whether they pay to train a Delta pilot or a NWA pilot, the cost is the same. In fact, you could argue that since a fence would mean only NWA pilots could bid the 330, then the cost could go down because it is more likely that guys already qualified will be the ones who bid it.

Except for the first six months where they have to cover moving costs to a new base, and/or a involuntary displacement. That is where the money come from, and a lot of it.

Unless they want those 330s based in ATL and nobody who lives in ATL can bid it. Then the entire staffing for that plane are eligible for a company-paid move.
Gets expensive real quick.

There are issues with or without a fence. Which would you rather? Protect what you have for a while or throw it all up in the air and let an arbitrator decide where the chips fall? At this point I don't see how we will agree on a list, both sides are ridiculous to the other.

Exactly. If you're going to have 10 year fences on all equipment, why even bother with a combined list? Its basically keeping two seperate companies for a decade. The list becomes almost irrelevant if the "conditions and restrictions" prevent any significant mixing.
Might as well wait 10 years and then do SLI.

Maybe we give up the paid move for tighter scope or more pay, something along those lines. A win win.

except that I have been told a relatively high amount of the NWA pilots commute anyway. The commuters would commute to ATL just as they commute to DTW or MSP. Add to that even without fences, I think there will be a pretty good amount of NWA pilots moving to LAX, SLC and ATL. There will also be smaller numbers of DAL pilots moving to MSP, and maybe even a few to DTW.

regardless, I think no matter what happens with the SLI, there will be some fences. The only question is how long.

Agreed. Just pointing out there's a big cost difference to the company between 3-5 year fences on two airplanes and 10 year fences on the entire fleet.