Originally Posted by eaglefly

Each committee had their own "modeling" programs in the effort to justify their arguments and associated seniority lists. It's pretty standard in SLI's.

Originally Posted by esadof

Don't know, all I know is we chose to use UAL's modeling program and expert instead of developing our own.

Originally Posted by Upsddown

They sure did but none of them garnered the attention from the arbs like the LAA committee model did. It also appears the LAA model had a lot more flexibility, functionality and ease of use in its design than the others.

Originally Posted by Upsddown

But back to the point. It wasn't about whether each committee had or didn't have a model. It's that the LAA committee spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on developing a very complicated model that wasn't necessarily needed with a straight NIC list. If their true intent was to use the NIC list why design such an expensive and complicated modeling program that was designed to model three separate hybrid lists and why just happen to roll it out in front of the arbs at the end of the hearings? Was it part of their strategy?

Originally Posted by eaglefly

I always laugh at those who actually counted the number of times "superior" was used in the LAA proposal. It tells me all I need to know about the emotion and ultimate bias in the post (and poster) it is included by. For the record, "superiority" by one carrier over another was considered by the UAL/CAL arbs as well, but in that case, they found neither was truly superior to the other considering relative pre-merger shareholder valuation of 55%/45%, pre-merger financial status, fleet composition, and pre-merger pilot compensation. The fact is this merger/SLI was far more unbalanced, hence AAPSIC's argument in that respect, which although distasteful to some (as it goes against their interests), but valid nonetheless. In fact, the East especially hinged a large part of their arguments against LAA pilots in this direction, attempting to dilute that superiority and in reading their arguments, failed IMO and if one looks at data provide, the AAPSIC has the longest, most involved foundation for their assertions and the East the shortest and least.

As far as buying the "new" AA (which is really the old "US Airways" except in name, paint job and uniform), I think the way this airline, its assets and its people are being managed, Jet Blue might indeed acquire some of LAA in a fragmentation scenario in the 4-8 year time frame. Of course, you'll argue that due to your superiority in that situation, all Group IV widebodies should be fully available to the JB pilots since they as the superior entity in that transaction are entitled to them.

Enjoy JB. I had the pleasure of talking to one of your pilots over a cerveza and your senior guys can make some good coin, but man do you work for it. Good luck on your first CBA as well. Until then, lets see what happens here as from all outward appearances, the East has already started their victory lap. Perhaps the finish line will have a tie stand selling ties with a flexed bicep on them ?

Originally Posted by Saul Rosenberg

Oh, so it was Microsoft Excel? My, but that is high tech. Must have impressed the panel....AAPSIC probably won the day!

Originally Posted by Saul Rosenberg

Wow, you really know a lot about all this seniority stuff. So, your opinion is the East arguments failed? So, you think it hurt them in the SLI?

Yeah I like your scenario about the AA lack of management and its demise and our eventual takeover....and then, right, LOS/DOH pretty much DOA because it's so lame right? It's how we do everything, except for MERGERS....duh!!!

Wait, Jet Blue? Did I say Jet Blue? I meant Republic. We "brickyard dogs" have been feeding ourselves rumors about buying Jet Blue for so long we've all started to believe it. Whooops-a-daisy...How embarrassing! Sorry.

Originally Posted by Upsddown

Yet the problem with that would be for the arbs to extract a "pound of flesh" out of the LAA pilots for their past actions it would result in the arbs actually doing even more harm to the TWA pilots. Hard to believe the arbs would have concluded to do greater harm to the very group they would be seeking to provide justice for. I think the AAPSIC realized this dichotomy as well.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

So you don't KNOW anything, but you make definitive statements like "Nothing new here- but it is entertaining watching them set themselves up for a major dose of reality coming their way"

Koontz was on C&R making statements just like that, no lie.