Dude, please.

First you get me to do your work for you, then you complain that I only answered your question by quoting one post instead of all of them? OK, so only one dude flat out said it (throughout several posts, not just one), but plenty of other NWA dudes carried on the discussion without scoffing at least the premise. For example:

From Carl Spackler:
"For those talking about NWA management not "letting" 1000 guys retire, you should know it's not management's decision to make. If 1000 NWA guys want to retire early, there's nothing that can be done......I know it's a high number, but I don't think it's quite 1000 guys."

From NwaF16dude:
"I'd have a hard time believing they'd let a 1000 go, but I'd sure love it if they did. Hope you're right"

I can't figure out how to quote from another thread and I'm sick of copy/paste, so that's all you get. You can look up the rest yourself. Take it or leave it. I'm out.

 

And that would be a monstrous win for NWA. Look at the net difference in relative position between the proposals and the opportunistic fence construction. I'm much more comfortable with an arbitrated decision based on recent history (especially Nicolau) than I am surrendering to an illogical position.

Yup, I hope both sides hear that. While the airlines aren't similar at all, the rationale used in the last ALPA case, using the same attorneys, with one party using the same "losing" economic model may give the Delta guys some cheer.

But a "win" for either side is a loss for all of us.

 

Slowplay,

I am confused at what you're point is. If it's that DAL is more likely to win with the arbitraitors and they shouldn't compromise because you're sure to win but a win for either side would be a loss for both then wouldn't that contradict you're premise of not moving from your position?

Arbitraitor Bloch said we were "equals" a word that DAL should take to heart since the premise of their argument, like you have emoted, that we are not equals and thus should get super seniority, (seniority above date of hire). If the arbitraitor is using the word equals then that should concern Dalpa that the relative seniority windfall is most likely not going to be awarded. Further, our argument that we have no desire to bid DAL equipment for ten years was to demonstrate to the arbitraitors that we are not looking for a windfall.

My point, and let me clear on this, is that I do not feel that neither Date of Hire nor Relative Seniority would be good for the combined airline. A move to the middle where we split our differences, and I personally would lose 850 numbers of seniority per DOH under that scenario, would be preferable to having either an arbritration board dictate our seniority or having one side win out. Neither side wants 5000 plus pilots or 7000 plus pilot disgrumbled and disenfranchised for the next twenty years.

My vote is we go to the middle. Any takers?

 

Exactly correct. He could have just said "preserve status quo" but he is a lawyer and why use three words when you can use thirty. Here are some legal definitions:

 

No Way. The Delta proposal takes into account the NWA fleet reductions and moves seniority 1 to 2% in favor of Delta. The NWA proposal moves seniority 11 to 17% in favor of NWA. So the "middle" is a huge gain for NWA.

The Delta side is obviously counting on getting a reasonable position accepted. The NWA side figures it is going to get split up the middle and presented a skewed position to throw the middle off on their side.

Both parties have their strategies. Middle is the absolute worst case for Delta, so no, no thanks. I can wait until Christmas for a decision that effects the next 30 years.

 

Nowhere did I say we should not compromise. NWA started on the 10 yard line. DAL started on the 40. Meeting in the middle takes us to the 35, an unrealistic result. Acceptable compromise puts us within a yard of the 50 either side.

Relative seniority a windfall? I'm sure you've had some nice gaps in hiring. Does a pilot on your list hired in 92 that's one number senior to a pilot hired in 94 have substantially greater relative seniority, even though his DOH is 2.5 years longer? Heck no. DOH is a specious argument except for pass priviliges and other benefits determined by longevity.

I've seen this movie, and so have the arbitrators. I think I'd rather see the 5000 ****ed than the 7000. The other way worked out very badly last time.

Of course, the best would be to have 12000 mildly irritated.

 

Are you girls done bickering yet?

 

If you think the arbitraitors are going to award Relative Seniority b/c you 2k more pilots than we do I would say you're wrong. Relative Seniority, the Dal list, has many of losing 1700 numbers. In ten years nwa/dal relative seniority will be close to the same to date of hire. So, effectively it will take ten years to get back to where I am today. Go ahead and try and justify that all you want but that would be an unbelievable windfall for DAL. So, don't go around saying you don't want to bid our airplanes if you're against fences. If Dal doesn't move from its position it will go to arbitraition. In the spring your premise was either take our proposal or the whole deal is off. Now, the deal is on no matter what. No more walking away b/c you didn't get your way. Our proposal, whether you like it or not, is a low cost proposal as it will not cause the displacement of one Dal pilot. So, don't think for a moment that the arbitraitiors won't take that into account.

The middle is the answer. A windfall for either side isn't. I realize I went to public schools so this seems so elemental and beyond me why others don't get it. Do you really want to spend the next decades working in an environment, from the training deptartment to line flying, where both sides are resentful and going after each other?

 

actually I do take heart from that statement. I believe equal means a Delta narrowbody captain is equal to a NWA narrowbody captain, a Delta widebody captain is equal to a NWA widebody captain, and the guy halfway up the Delta list is equal to the guy halfway up the NWA list......no matter when you were hired.

 

Pride before the fall! Equality does not mean a huge windfall for DAL, who under their will ratio puts nwa pilots behind them and then take full advantage of the nwa retirements. That is not equality. Date of hire with a ten year fence guarantees that not one nwa pilot will displace a Dal pilot and while you have zero attrition for the next decade you will watch tremendous attrition on the nwa side.

You can continue to argue your point but do not think for one second that the Nwaers are going to cave. Won't happen.