10 months to 190 Capt
01-22-2014, 08:53 PM
#132
Flies With The Hat On
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Right of the Left Seat
Posts: 1,339
10 months to 190 Capt
Previous ISL precedence in DAL, UAL and LCC will influence this merger. AA had nearly 891 furloughs and flow through pilots on its seniority list when the merger was announced on February 14th, 2013. None of these pilots had completed a year long probation period at AA. The most senior involuntary furlough on January 8, 2013 had less than 8 months of active service. Also, AE flow throughs had no recall rights.
A CEO's announcement of an airline merger is the industry standard time for a conditional notice seniority snapshot. AAMRQ pink slip penny stock did not fall back to 43 cents when the DOJ filed legal action. Filing a lawsuit is not to be confused with a judges ruling. Parker, Horton and their respective board members did not recent to the original stand alone plan of furloughing 400 pilots in addition to the 891 furloughs and flow thru pilots.
To be fair, furloughed AA pilots should get some type of credit for their active time on property. United ISL arbitration hints that the most senior AA pilot on furlough at the time of the merger announcement should receive ~8 months of active service as longevity.
A CEO's announcement of an airline merger is the industry standard time for a conditional notice seniority snapshot. AAMRQ pink slip penny stock did not fall back to 43 cents when the DOJ filed legal action. Filing a lawsuit is not to be confused with a judges ruling. Parker, Horton and their respective board members did not recent to the original stand alone plan of furloughing 400 pilots in addition to the 891 furloughs and flow thru pilots.
To be fair, furloughed AA pilots should get some type of credit for their active time on property. United ISL arbitration hints that the most senior AA pilot on furlough at the time of the merger announcement should receive ~8 months of active service as longevity.
01-22-2014, 10:25 PM
#133
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: FO
Posts: 92
Speaking for myself, I'm very thankfull for the merger, but certainly don't feel like I've got it made. For the long term I'm positive though.
01-22-2014, 10:32 PM
#134
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: FO
Posts: 92
Probably the most fair way to do it is to start with a relative list, based on positions, not people, on the date the merger was announced. For example, AA brings roughly 8200 positions to the dance while US brings 5100. So, the top 8200 AA pilots are considered active (whether they elected to come back or elected to stay out). Anyone below that point is considered furloughed. That prevents reordering your list. Now, the guys flying that fall below that line will scream bloody murder. But, the simple reality is they wouldn't be flying had all the senior guys come back (instead of bypassed).
Once you have a base list, with active positions, you can make individual adjustments for various criteria (length of service, career expectations, retirements, fleet compositions, etc). You determine the multiplier for each of these by doing a simple regression analysis of previous mergers (before and after seniority shifts), and choose average multipliers. This will then shuffle the positions.
Once you have the list finalized, you take the AA list and a US list and just start plugging in the names on it, based on the seniority at each respected carrier.
Then you take whichever names are left from each list (those that cannot hold positions at AA, new-hires on both sides, post-merger hires, etc) and find a way to blend them. I would propose a DoH list, adjusted for some LoS and career expectations.
While this method isn't perfect, it is basically what the last 30 years of mergers has looked like (the good mergers, that is). It means some furloughs will get put at the bottom, but others will get blended in with active service pilots. Both sides share equally in the loss of seniority and neither side gets a windfall. And, more importantly, both sides keep what they brought to the table.
Ooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrr............. we can just throw rocks at each other, building the animosity, refuse to agree on anything, and fight each other instead of unifying and getting an industry-leading contract. And, since the goal of the airline is not to simply be the biggest, but the best airline in the world, shouldn't we have the best contract in the industry? My thinking is we'd do a lot better to unify, come up with a reasonable solution for all, and spend our time/energy working on the JCBA. But, what do I know -- I'm just a junior F/O... (So I was told...).
Once you have a base list, with active positions, you can make individual adjustments for various criteria (length of service, career expectations, retirements, fleet compositions, etc). You determine the multiplier for each of these by doing a simple regression analysis of previous mergers (before and after seniority shifts), and choose average multipliers. This will then shuffle the positions.
Once you have the list finalized, you take the AA list and a US list and just start plugging in the names on it, based on the seniority at each respected carrier.
Then you take whichever names are left from each list (those that cannot hold positions at AA, new-hires on both sides, post-merger hires, etc) and find a way to blend them. I would propose a DoH list, adjusted for some LoS and career expectations.
While this method isn't perfect, it is basically what the last 30 years of mergers has looked like (the good mergers, that is). It means some furloughs will get put at the bottom, but others will get blended in with active service pilots. Both sides share equally in the loss of seniority and neither side gets a windfall. And, more importantly, both sides keep what they brought to the table.
Ooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrr............. we can just throw rocks at each other, building the animosity, refuse to agree on anything, and fight each other instead of unifying and getting an industry-leading contract. And, since the goal of the airline is not to simply be the biggest, but the best airline in the world, shouldn't we have the best contract in the industry? My thinking is we'd do a lot better to unify, come up with a reasonable solution for all, and spend our time/energy working on the JCBA. But, what do I know -- I'm just a junior F/O... (So I was told...).
01-23-2014, 06:26 AM
#137
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: AA A320
Posts: 1,624
01-23-2014, 06:48 AM
#138
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Interesting a former RJ pilot himself uses that as a term of belittlement toward another as if he's now something better than he was. I think you're going to fit right in with the Charlottans and it seems they're beaming the right minds up to the planet.
01-23-2014, 06:50 AM
#139
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
01-23-2014, 07:21 AM
#140
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 2,232
Keep sucking that USAPA juice box. The only thing I know (and need to know) is how to recognize those who reneg on agreements. Interesting a former RJ pilot himself uses that as a term of belittlement toward another as if he's now something better than he was. I think you're going to fit right in with the Charlottans and it seems they're beaming the right minds up to the planet.
Interesting a former RJ pilot himself uses that as a term of belittlement toward another as if he's now something better than he was. I think you're going to fit right in with the Charlottans and it seems they're beaming the right minds up to the planet.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
left seat
Flight Schools and Training
5
04-15-2008 08:46 PM
