SLI compromises
11-10-2008 | 04:17 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,457
Likes: 0
From: LAX ERA
Your comparing an international carrier with a regional RJ operator?
Ferd <-------confused at your point
11-10-2008 | 04:42 PM
#42
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 56
From: 765A
[quote=Ferd149;495700]Xray,
Your comparing an international carrier with a regional RJ operator?/quote]
ALPA policy has to work in any merger, no matter how far fetched. No two airlines are the same. DAL and NWA are pretty close, but they are not the same. Therefore, no two DOHs are the same. Fortunes rise and fall at airlines. Todays start-up may grow into a mainline legacy type carrier. Or todays mainline airline may end up a small regional. What has happened since you got hired should not work for you....or against you. Where you are today is all that matters.
But yes, I think to argue DOH is to argue that an ASA pilot hired one day before I was hired at DAL should go ahead of me should we merge. Or to look at it another way, supposed the combined DAL/NWA were to merge with AK down the road. Should a 737 captain who has no career expectation to an international widebody seat go ahead of a DL/NW pilot because of DOH?
Your comparing an international carrier with a regional RJ operator?/quote]
ALPA policy has to work in any merger, no matter how far fetched. No two airlines are the same. DAL and NWA are pretty close, but they are not the same. Therefore, no two DOHs are the same. Fortunes rise and fall at airlines. Todays start-up may grow into a mainline legacy type carrier. Or todays mainline airline may end up a small regional. What has happened since you got hired should not work for you....or against you. Where you are today is all that matters.
But yes, I think to argue DOH is to argue that an ASA pilot hired one day before I was hired at DAL should go ahead of me should we merge. Or to look at it another way, supposed the combined DAL/NWA were to merge with AK down the road. Should a 737 captain who has no career expectation to an international widebody seat go ahead of a DL/NW pilot because of DOH?
11-10-2008 | 05:52 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
[QUOTE=Xray678;495736]
You could use the same argument in regards to a straight ratio. Should a pilot at ASA sitting 25% on the list end up at 25% after you merge with them.
Wouldn't fences be needed to protect you from that AK 737 pilot taking your international widebody whether it's ratio or DOH?
Xray,
Your comparing an international carrier with a regional RJ operator?/quote]
ALPA policy has to work in any merger, no matter how far fetched. No two airlines are the same. DAL and NWA are pretty close, but they are not the same. Therefore, no two DOHs are the same. Fortunes rise and fall at airlines. Todays start-up may grow into a mainline legacy type carrier. Or todays mainline airline may end up a small regional. What has happened since you got hired should not work for you....or against you. Where you are today is all that matters.
But yes, I think to argue DOH is to argue that an ASA pilot hired one day before I was hired at DAL should go ahead of me should we merge. Or to look at it another way, supposed the combined DAL/NWA were to merge with AK down the road. Should a 737 captain who has no career expectation to an international widebody seat go ahead of a DL/NW pilot because of DOH?
Your comparing an international carrier with a regional RJ operator?/quote]
ALPA policy has to work in any merger, no matter how far fetched. No two airlines are the same. DAL and NWA are pretty close, but they are not the same. Therefore, no two DOHs are the same. Fortunes rise and fall at airlines. Todays start-up may grow into a mainline legacy type carrier. Or todays mainline airline may end up a small regional. What has happened since you got hired should not work for you....or against you. Where you are today is all that matters.
But yes, I think to argue DOH is to argue that an ASA pilot hired one day before I was hired at DAL should go ahead of me should we merge. Or to look at it another way, supposed the combined DAL/NWA were to merge with AK down the road. Should a 737 captain who has no career expectation to an international widebody seat go ahead of a DL/NW pilot because of DOH?
Wouldn't fences be needed to protect you from that AK 737 pilot taking your international widebody whether it's ratio or DOH?
11-10-2008 | 06:16 PM
#45
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
[quote=Xray678;495736]
You would understand if we were to merge with Virgin America for example. Somehow I don't think ratio would be in your vocabulary at all. Why - because ratioing a two year old airline in with Delta would be a HUGE windfall for VA. It would/should go DOH with fences to protect VA guys from being bumped from the equipment they brought. See how well that works?. It even works for an extreme example like Virgin America.
Carl
But yes, I think to argue DOH is to argue that an ASA pilot hired one day before I was hired at DAL should go ahead of me should we merge. Or to look at it another way, supposed the combined DAL/NWA were to merge with AK down the road. Should a 737 captain who has no career expectation to an international widebody seat go ahead of a DL/NW pilot because of DOH?
Carl
11-10-2008 | 09:33 PM
#46
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
From: A330 capt
I've already made one, but you all hated it because it didn't involve surrender. A great compromise would be a straight ratio right down to the exact .0000001% with dynamic seniority based on ACTUAL attrition. If I recall, the average negative response was: "as long as the dynamic seniority involves everything that could possibly be anticipated now and in the future."
Carl
Carl, upon further review I might be able, just barely, and with much trepidation, hesitation, and in need of further clarifications, to accept, on a highly contingent and conditional basis, with possible need of further modifications, your proposal.
By staight ratio I assume you mean 7/5 or 1.4/1? (1:1 ratio would, of course, result in 2000 DL on the bottom......where have I heard that before?
) Would the dynamic list run until everyone currently on the property was gone?(or should it run only as long as NW has more retirements?...hmmm...might have a problem with that) Or would it run until we both had say, 500 or 200 or 1000 retirements from the top half of our lists? Rumor has it that this list (with everyone currently on the property) was "run" in previous negotiations and resulted in the NW pilots being "swamped" by DL retirements after 2020, and thus rejected.
) Would the dynamic list run until everyone currently on the property was gone?(or should it run only as long as NW has more retirements?...hmmm...might have a problem with that) Or would it run until we both had say, 500 or 200 or 1000 retirements from the top half of our lists? Rumor has it that this list (with everyone currently on the property) was "run" in previous negotiations and resulted in the NW pilots being "swamped" by DL retirements after 2020, and thus rejected.What about the risk of the DC-9? and 747-200? Would your group be willing to take responsibility for the risks your group brings to the merger, in the form of those outmoded and uneconomical aircraft? say, for 3-5 yrs? (yes, we would take responsibility for ours) Would you be willing to accept a fence, or some mechanism, to contain that risk?
11-11-2008 | 01:45 AM
#47
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
From: A330 capt
No wiggy, I'm not confusing anything. You guys tickle me with your premise that DOH is the most far fetched concept on the planet. Most mergers have either gone straight DOH or have some DOH component in it.
There is an inherent fairness in giving each employee credit for every day that employee has worked for their pre-merger company. You must cross a very high bar to overcome that. In the previous distress mergers with DAL, you easily overcame that because there was no arbitration. America West was able to overcome it by showing USAir as an all but dead airline. I don't think you guys successfully showed that with NWA - although your team sure tried.
Each merger is different and there are many ways to overcome any unfairness involved with DOH. But DOH as a methodology is time tested, with a very long history. Does it get chosen as the method of construction in our case?...anybody's guess.
Carl
There is an inherent fairness in giving each employee credit for every day that employee has worked for their pre-merger company. You must cross a very high bar to overcome that. In the previous distress mergers with DAL, you easily overcame that because there was no arbitration. America West was able to overcome it by showing USAir as an all but dead airline. I don't think you guys successfully showed that with NWA - although your team sure tried.
Each merger is different and there are many ways to overcome any unfairness involved with DOH. But DOH as a methodology is time tested, with a very long history. Does it get chosen as the method of construction in our case?...anybody's guess.
Carl
Look at the "heart" of ALPA merger policy:
1. maintain or improve premerger pilot status.
2. minimize detrimental changes to career expectations.
The others are self-evident and uncontroversial, these two are more interesting and are very subtly crafted, on further examination:For (1.) let's stick with "maintain" rather than "improve" for the time being. So we're left with "maintain", but maintain what?..-premerger pilot status. Why didn't they just say "maintain pilot status"? Why "premerger" pilot status? Could it be they're acknowledging that each pilot group, taken separately, enjoys a "status" uniquely, relatively their own? If they had merely said "maintain pilot status", -a more general statement, wouldn't that imply there is some general, universal, absolute standard of "pilot status", that would apply (such as DOH or longevity)?
But the language does not say that, and ALPA therefore does not mean to imply that. Futhermore, the word "improve" as applied to a universal, absolute standard of "pilot status" would make no sense. How can you "improve" an absolute? How can you "improve" a date of hire, or a longevity?
Clearly the word "status" in the language "premerger pilot status" is not meant to imply there is some arbitrary, absolute "philosophical" standard, -but just the opposite. Status implies tangible assets---positions, categories, payrates, "jobs", held uniquely within and relative to that ("premerger") pilot group only. ALPA merger policy goal is to match and merge those respective tangibles as closely as possible to maintain and reflect, in the combined group, the very same unique, relative premerger positions, categories, "status" belonging to each group.
For (2.) notice it is written: "minimize detrimental changes to..." rather than "maximize beneficial changes to...." or "eliminate detrimental changes to..." or "maintain or improve career expectations". This seems to imply that detrimental changes are a "given" or, at least, highly likely, or, just likely. In any event, detrimental changes are anticipated, and this ambiguous language is used to address an ambiguous idea...the future, notoriously unpredictable, futilely (for our purposes) acted upon in the present, thus having the lowest chance of success, or the lowest chance of having any affect at all,... but embraced in principle by all of us....tough thing to do without stepping on some toes...."at the expense of the other"
Last edited by wiggy; 11-11-2008 at 07:28 AM.
11-11-2008 | 04:04 AM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
[quote=Eric Stratton;495840]
You could use the same argument in regards to a straight ratio. Should a pilot at ASA sitting 25% on the list end up at 25% after you merge with them.
Wouldn't fences be needed to protect you from that AK 737 pilot taking your international widebody whether it's ratio or DOH?
Nope. Delta's proposal looks at the value of the job brought, hence a category based ratio. That's why there were 400 NWA pilots at the bottom of the DAL list, because they brought the 400 lowest value jobs to the merger (based on pre-merger contracts). That's why the 744 and 742 weren't viewed as "super premium" adjective flying; they brought lower total pre-merger compensation than the DAL 777/764.
Should DAL merge with a regional feeder, under a category ratio system the RJ pilots would be merged in with the value of the job they brought. Same with ALA, their 737's would integrate with DAL 737's-757's, because they have 737-900's and prior to this merger slightly higher total compensation.
It's a watercooler discussion anyway. Unless there is some change in the opinions of the leadership this week, the wiseguys will get to make the list, and we'll get to live with it.
btw, Carl's inelegant solution out there in the dynamic list can be shot right back at him. Carl just wants to take one argument that benefits him the most and make that dynamic. He doesn't want the rest of the baggage. If you make all factors dynamic, I'm sure the group could accept it, although each time the list shuffled there would be a reminder of the merger and fodder for grievances.
You could use the same argument in regards to a straight ratio. Should a pilot at ASA sitting 25% on the list end up at 25% after you merge with them.
Wouldn't fences be needed to protect you from that AK 737 pilot taking your international widebody whether it's ratio or DOH?
Should DAL merge with a regional feeder, under a category ratio system the RJ pilots would be merged in with the value of the job they brought. Same with ALA, their 737's would integrate with DAL 737's-757's, because they have 737-900's and prior to this merger slightly higher total compensation.
It's a watercooler discussion anyway. Unless there is some change in the opinions of the leadership this week, the wiseguys will get to make the list, and we'll get to live with it.
btw, Carl's inelegant solution out there in the dynamic list can be shot right back at him. Carl just wants to take one argument that benefits him the most and make that dynamic. He doesn't want the rest of the baggage. If you make all factors dynamic, I'm sure the group could accept it, although each time the list shuffled there would be a reminder of the merger and fodder for grievances.
11-11-2008 | 05:45 AM
#50
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Nope. Delta's proposal looks at the value of the job brought, hence a category based ratio. That's why there were 400 NWA pilots at the bottom of the DAL list, because they brought the 400 lowest value jobs to the merger (based on pre-merger contracts). That's why the 744 and 742 weren't viewed as "super premium" adjective flying; they brought lower total pre-merger compensation than the DAL 777/764.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
