Saul Rosenberg

Dude (David), if you want to come off sounding like you can read and comprehend your own cut-and-paste briefs and transcripts...perhaps you could read them really slow and repeatedly and then maybe you'd see that YOU ARE NOT PROVING ANYONE WRONG except yourself

Your OWN post indicates DOH ADJUSTED FOR FURLOUGH TIME, which is, of course LOS. This is EXACTLY what I said the ALPA proposal was.

You and WD(RB) seem related...both have the same inability and/or reluctance to respond to people in a linear manner, both refuse to answer direct and reasonable questions when it doesn't promote your world view, both think they've been towering high on the LUS seniority list since 2007.

Sliceback

Where's the SLI? "We believe it might be next week."

Good source, interesting to see if they're accurate.

Upsddown

Sliceback,

Who knows for sure but it would be amazing if they put the list out on September 2nd without knowing the exact number of Letter T pilots. Especially given after an 18 month process and just six days later than your source's prediction the arbs will receive the actual number. I believe you even had a previous post about a dozen or so Letter T pilots not showing up the day of class. If they put it out by the 2nd how would they address the Letter T pilot situation?

That in my view would be one boneheaded move by the arbs.

Will shall see but I'm still not expecting anything until after the 8th.

Saabs

What does the SLI have to do with letter T pilots? Is there a stipulation?

Or are y'all just saying it would be nice if it were out for them to see where they stand before they accept?

Saul Rosenberg

Upsddown,

What's the issue with Letter T again? I've heard people say that it's a big deal and others say it doesn't matter, that they would just be removed if they don't show up. Is it that their presence on the list will skew the category/status calculations?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MarineGrunt

Nothing. People are just playing guessing games again. Nobody knows anything.

Spoiler

the letter T's must say yes to get the class well before the start date but can no show or resign any time. Hearing the number is 28 for the Aug class and in the range of a couple of dozen for the Sep class.
Betting if the no show rate is high then the will wait till after the sep must report date but if not, the margin of error for the small class will not significantly change the list and they may release it anyway.

Sliceback

Ups - if anyone had good info the source would be one of them. He said it to several dozen people so it wasn't 'classified'. No clue if he had serious intell or was just throwing out wishful thinking.

Depending upon the ruling the Letter T effect at this point might matter or it might not matter. They could release it with a clause to adjust for any Letter T adjustments.

Upsddown

It's actually fairly complex but here is the readers digest version.

On DOC (12/13/13) there were three lists. Each list had X amount of pilots on their seniority list and each group brought X amount of positions. To account for those excess pilots on the list vs positions adjustments needed to be made. Each group contained in the list but not actually on status at the time had to be addressed. This included, medical, leaves, furloughs, etc.

Most were straight forward but Letter T pilots presented an unusual situation as LAA argued they weren't on furlough status anymore as they had been offered an opportunity to return to
LAA and pilots junior to them had been hired off the street. East and West argued they were furloughed pilots and as a result LAA brought more pilots than positions so LAA should be required to move an equivalent number of their pilots to the bottom of the list.

Since there were nearly 1,000 more LAA pilots remaining in Letter T status (section of the contract they are covered under) East and West argued the bottom 1,000 LAA pilots on DOC should be placed on the bottom of the list behind all LUS pilots hired pre-DOC.

The LAA committee proposal was that on the date of implementation of the list the number of bottom LAA pilots (pre-DOC) equal to the number of "actual" returning Letter T pilots should be moved behind pre-DOC pilots not 1,000 as East and West argued.

Regardless of the side you are on, it's hard to see the fairness in moving 1,000 LAA pilots to the bottom of the pre-DOC list if only 200 Letter T pilots returned. That would mean 800 LAA pilots lost seniority for no reason.

In essence the argument is LAA brough 8,000 positions (rough estimate). Any number of pilots in excess of this number needs to be put at the bottom of the combined pre-DOC list to adjust for the overage. If 200 Letter T pilots came back then 200 LAA pilots would be "adjusted back" (not necessarily stapled).

There are a number of pre-DOC pilots (LAA and LUS) whose future placement cannot be determined if the arbs intend to develop a truly "fair and equatable" list. Would it really be fair to move an LAA pilot back on the list if in fact there wasn't an additional Letter T pilot who returned to fill his/her original position? Remember the last of these LAA pilots are the most senior of the group being adjusted back (reverse seniority order).

So as it sits. A class showed up today. There are still a small number of Letter T pilots who have the opportunity to return to the September 6/8 class.
Many Letter T pilots are waiting until the last minute before calling and saying no as they want to see if the SLI list comes out first. There are about 20 or so LAA pilots who still may need to be adjusted backwards (if 20 Letter T pilots show up in September). Putting out the list before knowing how they are affected by returning Letter T pilots would be a guess by the arbs. I don't see any guessing by the arbs at this point.

Imagine you were the last LAA pilot adjusted based on a guess of 20 Letter T pilots coming back and only 19 actually returned and as a result you were moved 300 pilots (hypothetical) back on the combined list. Would you see that as "fair"?

Sliceback says he heard next week. There is a possible scenario based on the number of Letter T pilots who returned today and the total possible remaining Letter T pilots that the arbs can correctly answer the question now.

If the total number of bottom (pre-DOC) LAA pilots equal to the total number of possible remaining Letter T pilots would not need to be adjusted backwards because of their LOS compared to LUS pilots it could be possible that with or without the remaining Letter T pilots returning the potential impacted LAA pilots seniority placement would be the same. In other words, their LOS would be adjusted, but when adjusted they are still senior to the LUS pilots immediately below them because of the much less LOS of the LUS pilots.
In that scenario whether the remaining Letter T pilots return or not the LAA pilots seniority remains senior to the LUS pilots below them.

I haven't looked that closely at the bottom of the list to see if that's possible. If it is the list could come out next week because the arbs have the answer to the Letter T question.

MarineGrunt seems to have thought this much more through (there is a marine joke in there somewhere). But I still think it's more likely on September 9-12 unless the scenario above occurs then Sliceback may be right.

Does anyone think after 4 weeks they are still reading through the comments? If not, what's the hold up?

Upsddown

A quick look.

The 200th LAA pilot was hired 7/23/2001. Furloughed around Oct/Nov 2001. Offered recall by 5/2013. Total LOS on 12/13/13 approximately 10 months.

On DOC, 254 LUS pilots had less LOS than he had.

For this last pilot we are waiting on it may mean losing up to 254 numbers. Think it's important to him?