What are "prevailing equities"
11-01-2008, 12:45 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: LAX ERA
Posts: 3,457
Denny,
I guess this is where I differ with everyone. I think too much like a management slug so I would like to see no fences and have the ability to maximize (in a perfect world and really smart managers - like strawberry fields forever) profit.
Now with that said, the pure ratio doesn't work with our demographics because, in general, we are older. So, the senior guys retire and we all move up. Then Carl and I retire and more Delta guys move up to the point that 5 to 10 years down the road the upper third of the list (and the widebodys) are all old Delta.
The days of service idea sounds interesting, but I would like to see it before I say more. I know.............chicken!
Ferd
PS..........Allan and Shirley have signed on to represent exNWA guys in all future arbritrations
I guess this is where I differ with everyone. I think too much like a management slug so I would like to see no fences and have the ability to maximize (in a perfect world and really smart managers - like strawberry fields forever) profit.
Now with that said, the pure ratio doesn't work with our demographics because, in general, we are older. So, the senior guys retire and we all move up. Then Carl and I retire and more Delta guys move up to the point that 5 to 10 years down the road the upper third of the list (and the widebodys) are all old Delta.
The days of service idea sounds interesting, but I would like to see it before I say more. I know.............chicken!
Ferd
PS..........Allan and Shirley have signed on to represent exNWA guys in all future arbritrations
11-01-2008, 01:17 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Carl,
I try not to get into the "your proposal is worse than my proposal" argument because the same argument can be thrown back and forth with nothing constructive to come of it. Although, at times, I've had a hard time not saying "Right back at ya!!!" (This comment is not directed at you)
We get an extra month now to go back and forth with the discussion. IMO, All to no avail because it is not up to us. Again, in my pessimistic mode, I just cannot see a negotiated agreement.
As I have said before, one side will have to come off it's basic premise of status and category or DOH for there to be an agreement and I just don't see that happening unless the arbitrators go to one side or the other and say something to the effect "you wont like our list more than the other guys wont like our list." I just don't see them doing that. I believe you mentioned in another post about length of service, that's still a DOH modified list and, as the basic premise, its DOH. Not gonna float on my side just as modified status and category list isn't gonna float on your side.
We are the proverbial dogs chasing their tails. Neither one of us is going to convince the other that they are right. It's an exercise in futility. Although, I like to think that I'm like the crusty old Capt. that once told me, when dealing with a angry gate agent, "Why get angry when you know you're going to win the argument?!"
Ahhh.......The power of the brakes!!!!! I love it!!
I'll always be around to ask questions, try to clarify what I know and TRY to stay out of the mudslinging........unless it's warm mud and there are bikini clad women involved!!!!!! Too much typing!!!
Denny
I try not to get into the "your proposal is worse than my proposal" argument because the same argument can be thrown back and forth with nothing constructive to come of it. Although, at times, I've had a hard time not saying "Right back at ya!!!" (This comment is not directed at you)
We get an extra month now to go back and forth with the discussion. IMO, All to no avail because it is not up to us. Again, in my pessimistic mode, I just cannot see a negotiated agreement.
As I have said before, one side will have to come off it's basic premise of status and category or DOH for there to be an agreement and I just don't see that happening unless the arbitrators go to one side or the other and say something to the effect "you wont like our list more than the other guys wont like our list." I just don't see them doing that. I believe you mentioned in another post about length of service, that's still a DOH modified list and, as the basic premise, its DOH. Not gonna float on my side just as modified status and category list isn't gonna float on your side.
We are the proverbial dogs chasing their tails. Neither one of us is going to convince the other that they are right. It's an exercise in futility. Although, I like to think that I'm like the crusty old Capt. that once told me, when dealing with a angry gate agent, "Why get angry when you know you're going to win the argument?!"
Ahhh.......The power of the brakes!!!!! I love it!!I'll always be around to ask questions, try to clarify what I know and TRY to stay out of the mudslinging........unless it's warm mud and there are bikini clad women involved!!!!!!
Too much typing!!!Denny
11-01-2008, 01:23 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: LAX ERA
Posts: 3,457
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
We are the proverbial dogs chasing their tails. Neither one of us is going to convince the other that they are right. It's an exercise in futility.
Denny
Denny
11-01-2008, 01:43 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Well, now that you mention election coverage, I guess this isn't so bad!!! Good conversation with verying viewpoints. What more could one ask for?!!
I'm so sick and tired of getting recorded "vote for me" calls, I could just......sit on the pot!!!!!
Denny
PS. I agree with you, I don't like fences either. I hope people much smarter than I can figure this out.
Good conversation with verying viewpoints. What more could one ask for?!!I'm so sick and tired of getting recorded "vote for me" calls, I could just......sit on the pot!!!!!
Denny
PS. I agree with you, I don't like fences either. I hope people much smarter than I can figure this out.
11-01-2008, 09:03 PM
#46
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Scoop
Carl,
On a seperate post I asked if any Green Book guys had any comments on the 20 year fences - not one response. It appears that fences are very popular if you are "fenced-in" not so popular if you are "fenced-out."
On a seperate post I asked if any Green Book guys had any comments on the 20 year fences - not one response. It appears that fences are very popular if you are "fenced-in" not so popular if you are "fenced-out."
Originally Posted by Scoop
Anyhow I think most DAL guys would love fences but why no fence protection for junior FO's? IF you guys want to fence off your heavies - great, but if the DC-9's are rock solid with the price of oil declining back it up with a fence. If the 9's get parked the furloughs come from the NW side. If DAL parks 88's the furloughs come from the DAL side. I have said before this would allow much more flexiiblity with the bottom of both lists which seem to be a problem area.
Originally Posted by Scoop
You guys are definitely trying to "cherry-pick" where the fences will go, and I don't blame you, but at least admit it.
Carl
11-01-2008, 09:20 PM
#47
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
Carl,
As I have said before, one side will have to come off it's basic premise of status and category or DOH for there to be an agreement and I just don't see that happening unless the arbitrators go to one side or the other and say something to the effect "you wont like our list more than the other guys wont like our list." I just don't see them doing that.
As I have said before, one side will have to come off it's basic premise of status and category or DOH for there to be an agreement and I just don't see that happening unless the arbitrators go to one side or the other and say something to the effect "you wont like our list more than the other guys wont like our list." I just don't see them doing that.
If I was on the NWA team, my bottom line position of what I would accept in negotiations would be a straight mathematical ratio right down to the .000001%. Then apply a minimal fence IF dynamic seniority was instituted. With dynamic seniority, NWA will only get credit for retirements that actually happen. Same for DAL when their retirements begin to spool up. I know people will pipe up about how that's the most unfair SLI proposal they've ever heard, but if NWA guys can't achieve that via negotiations, then I would take the chance with arbitration.
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
unless it's warm mud and there are bikini clad women involved!!!!!!
Carl - sadly, not Denny Crane
11-01-2008, 10:52 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: A330 capt
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Your premise as to NWA using "look ahead" as the basis for constructing the seniority list is completely wrong. You seem to be implying that NWA is using that to somehow justify our whacky notion of DOH. If that is what you are implying, it shows how your own personal bias is blinding you. And your not alone.
NWA does not need to defend DOH as a methodology.
It has been used in whole or in part for many arbitrated lists.
NWA guys offer no apologies for wanting credit for every day of service from our airline - and thus we need no justification.
There is an inherent fairness to the DOH concept.
If the demographics were reversed, every Delta pilot would see this with complete clarity.
The "look ahead" is used to show why a 10 year fence is needed to protect DAL pilots until most of the senior NWA guys are gone.
We could have just proffered DOH without a fence, but then our award would be just as extreme as the DAL proposal.
Last edited by wiggy; 11-01-2008 at 11:01 PM.
11-01-2008, 11:09 PM
#49
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Wiggy,
Studies have shown that most people listen to someone only long enough to defend or refute. As soon as the person thinks of a defense or a refutation, they're done listening. You are one of those people. There is so much wrong with what you've posted that I don't even want to try to correct. First of all you wouldn't listen, secondly it wouldn't matter. NWA pilots haven't surrendered, and that is the only thing that you're interested in.
Bye,
Carl
Studies have shown that most people listen to someone only long enough to defend or refute. As soon as the person thinks of a defense or a refutation, they're done listening. You are one of those people. There is so much wrong with what you've posted that I don't even want to try to correct. First of all you wouldn't listen, secondly it wouldn't matter. NWA pilots haven't surrendered, and that is the only thing that you're interested in.
Bye,
Carl
11-02-2008, 03:54 AM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Carl, There is one simple fact about mergers. If DOH benefits your group then it if the only fair way to merge a list. If if does not then some form of ratio is the only fair way to merge the list. Prior to this round of merger talks I did not know a single Red book pilot at NWA who felt the Roberts award was fair.
I also have no doubt that if the positions were reversed and NWA had enjoyed greater growth and a newer fleet they would be on this forum screaming about how unfair DOH would be in merging the lists.
The truth in the end is simple. Each side will always 100 percent of the time advocate the positions that is best for them. In this case arbitrators will make the final decision. Regardless of how that award comes down I will honor the decision and not blame NWA pilots for the outcome if it goes bad. They are doing what we are doing. Seeking the best deal for both sides. The only complaint I have had is the questionable accurracy of some things put out by the NWA mec and the need for observers ect.. that hinder committee work. I have no complaint at all about NWA asking for DOH. I have no doubt that if DOH benefited the Delta pilots we would be asking for it and I have no doubt that if a ratio benefited the NWA pilots they would be asking for a ratio as they did in their last merger.
I also have no doubt that if the positions were reversed and NWA had enjoyed greater growth and a newer fleet they would be on this forum screaming about how unfair DOH would be in merging the lists.
The truth in the end is simple. Each side will always 100 percent of the time advocate the positions that is best for them. In this case arbitrators will make the final decision. Regardless of how that award comes down I will honor the decision and not blame NWA pilots for the outcome if it goes bad. They are doing what we are doing. Seeking the best deal for both sides. The only complaint I have had is the questionable accurracy of some things put out by the NWA mec and the need for observers ect.. that hinder committee work. I have no complaint at all about NWA asking for DOH. I have no doubt that if DOH benefited the Delta pilots we would be asking for it and I have no doubt that if a ratio benefited the NWA pilots they would be asking for a ratio as they did in their last merger.
