Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   XJ 9E 9L SLI Thread (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/56864-xj-9e-9l-sli-thread.html)

Bartok 02-15-2011 09:00 AM


Originally Posted by jayray2 (Post 948004)
How would your relative seniority change at all by moving your DOH? It wouldn't at all would it?

It would not, but I think the point is that the DOH method is going to be even more beneficial to 9E pilots than my numbers show because they will get a 3 month shift up when their real DOH is applied.

mooney 02-15-2011 10:33 AM

...........delete

AxialFlow 02-15-2011 10:33 AM


Originally Posted by Bartok (Post 947134)
They are entitled to be merged fairly with the same criteria as everyone else, and that includes their original XJ DOH.

Premerger, they had no job. Then they were offered jobs WITH longevity taken into consideration for their pay. And now they're making more than the other pilots in their class. What shaft did they get again? We should use historical practices for furloughs.

mooney 02-15-2011 10:41 AM


Originally Posted by AxialFlow (Post 948063)
Premerger, they had no job. Then they were offered jobs WITH longevity taken into consideration for their pay. And now they're making more than the other pilots in their class. What shaft did they get again? We should use historical practices for furloughs.

I'm gonna agree with Axial (someone please pinch me).
Say there are 2 XJ furloghs....1 with a 2008 hire date and one with a 2009 hire date. 2008 passes on getting hired at 9e with longevity bennies, but 2009 guy gets employed at 9e with XJ longevity. What gives the right for the guy who voluntarily said "no thanks" in the first round and is still unemployed to think he should be senior to the guy who showed incentive and took the 9e job? i think all XJ furloughs that took jobs at 9e should end up senior to the ones that didn't. The 2008 guy gambled when offered a job and lost. That happens in this industry...

RatherBGolfin 02-15-2011 10:53 AM


Originally Posted by mooney (Post 948070)
I'm gonna agree with Axial (someone please pinch me).
Say there are 2 XJ furloghs....1 with a 2008 hire date and one with a 2009 hire date. 2008 passes on getting hired at 9e with longevity bennies, but 2009 guy gets employed at 9e with XJ longevity. What gives the right for the guy who voluntarily said "no thanks" in the first round and is still unemployed to think he should be senior to the guy who showed incentive and took the 9e job? i think all XJ furloughs that took jobs at 9e should end up senior to the ones that didn't. The 2008 guy gambled when offered a job and lost. That happens in this industry...

And what would you propose happen to the more senior people that took voluntary furloughs and pursued other options with the intent that a more junior people might keep their jobs? There can't be a set of rules for those at the bottom of the list that is different for those in the middle or top. This isn't a black and white issue. Like it was said before, let the SLI people do their job, and when it's all over with lets all come back and complain about it. There's is nothing we can do about what they come up with.

mooney 02-15-2011 11:01 AM


Originally Posted by RatherBGolfin (Post 948075)
And what would you propose happen to the more senior people that took voluntary furloughs and pursued other options with the intent that a more junior people might keep their jobs? There can't be a set of rules for those at the bottom of the list that is different for those in the middle or top. This isn't a black and white issue. Like it was said before, let the SLI people do their job, and when it's all over with lets all come back and complain about it. There's is nothing we can do about what they come up with.

i don't disagree with you, I just threw that out there for the sake of the rest of the argument on this board. Nothing is black and white as you pointed out and we have zero say in it. But I do find it hard to believe that all the senior peeps who took voluntary furloghs did it with the intent of a more Jr guy being able to keep his job. There must have been other motives that benefitted them. Read all the crap on this forum there is no team, everyone is out for numero uno. ;)

Bartok 02-15-2011 12:56 PM


Originally Posted by mooney (Post 948070)
I'm gonna agree with Axial (someone please pinch me).
Say there are 2 XJ furloghs....1 with a 2008 hire date and one with a 2009 hire date. 2008 passes on getting hired at 9e with longevity bennies, but 2009 guy gets employed at 9e with XJ longevity. What gives the right for the guy who voluntarily said "no thanks" in the first round and is still unemployed to think he should be senior to the guy who showed incentive and took the 9e job? i think all XJ furloughs that took jobs at 9e should end up senior to the ones that didn't. The 2008 guy gambled when offered a job and lost. That happens in this industry...

Because that was the deal they were offered. If they were made the offer that they had to go to 9E or 9L or lose their XJ seniority, I would agree with you, but they were not given that offer.

We won't even know for certain if anyone will be integrated until the day after tomorrow anyway.

What if they didn't want to take the chance that they would have been stuck under 9E's current contract or worse yet, Colgan's non-contract?

Like I've said before, if they were merging the lists and the XJ furloughs were going to displace someone else on the list into furlough, then I agree with you, but that is not the case at all.

They are on XJ's seniority list, and they deserve all of it's protections.

Bartok 02-15-2011 12:57 PM


Originally Posted by AxialFlow (Post 948063)
Premerger, they had no job. Then they were offered jobs WITH longevity taken into consideration for their pay. And now they're making more than the other pilots in their class. What shaft did they get again? We should use historical practices for furloughs.

The historical practice is wrong and selfish.

jayray2 02-15-2011 01:21 PM


Originally Posted by Bartok (Post 948134)
The historical practice is wrong and selfish.

Is there really even a historical precedent set on this in the Regional industry? They are on the XJ seniority list and they deserve to get integrated in seniority order just like everyone else. That is why we have a Union and I would expect the Union to uphold their seniority rights just like they are going to respect every other pilot's seniority right.

anthony210 02-15-2011 02:10 PM


Originally Posted by jayray2 (Post 948141)
Is there really even a historical precedent set on this in the Regional industry? They are on the XJ seniority list and they deserve to get integrated in seniority order just like everyone else. That is why we have a Union and I would expect the Union to uphold their seniority rights just like they are going to respect every other pilot's seniority right.

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. My guess is the SLI will be handled just as most other mergers have, especially if it goes to arbitration. Which it probably will.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:24 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands