eaglefly

48% pilot furloughs ?

You may want to recheck that. That would be about 5000 pre-merger AA pilots. Most U pilots danced with glee when the merger happened and are now making substantially more money (and soon even more again) then without the merger. But, this is yet another argument for long fences separating pre-merger groups. Again, few of us at AA want to drag you down.

I know several of the East pilots here are more then cool with that and have said so repeatedly in the past.

Big E 757

Eagle fly, Alfa was the guy that put our (Delta's) combined seniority list together during our arbitration and ours was the one chosen by the arbitrators (with one or two slight tweeks I believe). The UAL MEC hired him to put their combined list together for their arbitration which was the one chosen by their arbitrators (with a few minor tweeks I believe). He knows exactly what arbitrators think, EXACTLY how they approach these things.

You don't start here, the west guys start here, and the east guys start here, and the arbitrators find a happy middle ground. Whoever has the most fair and reasonable proposal wins.

In my opinion, whichever group hires him first wins....period.

eaglefly

Well, the Delta/NWA SLI was a pretty even match, so it would seem that specific SLI would not only be much easier to quantify, but have less contentious issues as well. This is arguably the most complicated SLI in history. If you are saying your last sentence is the way it will be, you'll note I agree completely with that as per my previous comments. The West WILL present their model based on the Nic, the East WILL present their model based NOT on the Nic and LAA is likely to base theirs on other factors that while not in opposition to the Nic, will not be in its pure order. The arbitrators will likely then accept none of the proposals in THEIR pure forms and craft a hybrid result that in their opinion is the most fair and equitable. Your term "reasonable" is a subjective term and each committee (and pilot group as evidenced here) sees that in completely different terms. "Fair" is for the arbitrators to decide and "equitable" means they have to start with something quantifiable in the first place.

I find this a curious statement. If that's the case, it would seem that HE would be the final word on the make-up of the ISL and there would be little need for the arbitrators, but them simply being a rubber stamp for his model. Additionally, that claim would seem to be a set-up for bias as whomever had the most money, or whom he was most sympathetic to would seem to have bought or acquired an unfair advantage that the arbitrators would in theory not overlook. Of course, I suppose he could show up at the arbitration and the three arbitrators would be so awestruck, they'd adopt his model right there and then as you confirm has happened in the past ?

I don't think ANY of us wants a "ringer" involved with this arbitration, do you ?

Well, maybe some do.

It would seem to subvert the whole point of independent arbitrators making the decisions and even the purpose and legitimacy of NMB. In reality, in THIS arbitration there will be no ringers or any one side having an advantage simply based on the outcome of a previous SLI or someone's participation and/or success arguing that one. This one will hinge on its OWN merits and what weight those merits have are for the arbitrators to decide and not one of us knows that, not even your ringer.

Sliceback

YOU might want to recheck your numbers. With 'facts' like that your credibility takes a huge hit.

eaglefly

Since you have been one here to ALWAYS criticize me (hatred of flow-thru's has always been my belief), I'd be honored if you'd correct my latest error with the facts. I was unaware 48% of AA pilots were on furlough on the date of merger announcement (the only relevant snapshot of this variable for SLI purposes). Unlike many here, I am incorrect at times, have admitted it in the past and always willing to BE corrected. So, instead of just sport-crapping on me yet again, could you simply correct me without the drama ?

Thanks.

Wiskey Driver

Whats there to recheck? That was the state of usair at the time they were bailed out. There were flat broke running on life support and AWA made the last of their payroll. 48% of their pilot force was furloughed so really what do you want to see rechecked?

Parker has said he wants no fences but not so sure he can really control that, maybe but who really knows. The east is cool with what ever gives them the absolute best and everyone else be damned.

WD at AWA

Sliceback

I didn't quote the 48% furloughs.

Hatred of F/T's? That's laughable. I see that your ability to understand people you've never met is still running at full speed. As for F/T's I'm glad for them. No wink, wink. I'm glad they've had opportunities they've never had before. I've flown with several of them. Most of them are having a blast and I enjoy that with them. There's the random bitter pill but that's the exception.

Wiskey Driver

EF you failed to really read what I said and took a number (48%) and grouped AA into that. I think if you go back you will find your error and correct it without my or anyone else's help.

WD at AWA

eaglefly

No, actually I assumed you were using sarcasm and implying 48% of AA pilots were on furlough. So that WAS my error. My apologies.

But IMO, PAST furloughs or bankruptcies will have less impact on SLI considerations then the pre-merger snapshot and some consideration and quantification as to what each carrier's future was absent the merger. As a complicator on the US Airways side, add to that the uncertainty of the West's ability to force an integration with the East who from all appearances would have continued to be successful in their end run around the Nicolau award for many, many years.

eaglefly

You can see my error in the quoted section of your post. I quoted my assumption of your point being 5000 pre-merger "AA pilots" (which would be the entire East and then some and three times the West) and so clearly we were on different pages. I take responsibility for misinterpreting your post though.