Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-26-2012, 08:52 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
I agree - a lot of angst over something that may, or may never be. As far as the junior HA guys currently holding the 330, that would not matter to us at all.
When you merge based on relative seniority it has to do with how many total seat positions that they bring to the table. For example regarding the 330, the pertinent number is the number of 330A and 330B positions they have. What each individual Pilot bids for or currently holds is totally irrelevant.
Scoop
When you merge based on relative seniority it has to do with how many total seat positions that they bring to the table. For example regarding the 330, the pertinent number is the number of 330A and 330B positions they have. What each individual Pilot bids for or currently holds is totally irrelevant.
Scoop
09-26-2012, 08:57 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Well, HI isn't deep into BK and argueably about to liquidate. And HALPA won't likely waive their scope and M&A language, nor will ALPA and independant lawyers they hire advise them to, nor will DALPA/DL/RA ask them to as a precondition of the merger. And even if aaaaaaaaaaaaaall that happened anyway, the TWA pattern still has the top seniority tier zippered into the top of the DL list just like the top tier of TWA was with the AA list.
Anyway I'm not advocating for a staple of the entire pilot group. All I'm saying is that many things should be taken into account and in no way should DALPA facilitate every new hire class jumping up 1 or 2000 numbers just because they ran another new hire class just prior to the merger date. IMO 100% of first and second year HI pilots should be stapled (especially with their horrendously low pay) the rest can be zippered in starting at the 330 level or slightly lower if we add in some base locks for them. Some HI pilots would end up quite high on the list, and that's fine.
And maybe (probably) they will force it to arbitration anyway. That's fine, that's how it works. But DALPA shouldn't just roll over and accept a full on relative windfall, especially for 1st and 2nd year pilots that would be insane. DALPA has an obligation to fight for current DALPA pilots and I would expect them to do that. If the end result of an arbitrated award is "unfair" then oh well.
Anyway I'm not advocating for a staple of the entire pilot group. All I'm saying is that many things should be taken into account and in no way should DALPA facilitate every new hire class jumping up 1 or 2000 numbers just because they ran another new hire class just prior to the merger date. IMO 100% of first and second year HI pilots should be stapled (especially with their horrendously low pay) the rest can be zippered in starting at the 330 level or slightly lower if we add in some base locks for them. Some HI pilots would end up quite high on the list, and that's fine.
And maybe (probably) they will force it to arbitration anyway. That's fine, that's how it works. But DALPA shouldn't just roll over and accept a full on relative windfall, especially for 1st and 2nd year pilots that would be insane. DALPA has an obligation to fight for current DALPA pilots and I would expect them to do that. If the end result of an arbitrated award is "unfair" then oh well.
HAL, well, give or take some of their guys will win very big and that's just the way it is when we've determined relative seniority is the way.
09-26-2012, 09:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
09-26-2012, 09:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: B744 F/O
Posts: 141
09-26-2012, 09:04 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
I agree - a lot of angst over something that may, or may never be. As far as the junior HA guys currently holding the 330, that would not matter to us at all.
When you merge based on relative seniority it has to do with how many total seat positions that they bring to the table. For example regarding the 330, the pertinent number is the number of 330A and 330B positions they have. What each individual Pilot bids for or currently holds is totally irrelevant.
Scoop
When you merge based on relative seniority it has to do with how many total seat positions that they bring to the table. For example regarding the 330, the pertinent number is the number of 330A and 330B positions they have. What each individual Pilot bids for or currently holds is totally irrelevant.
Scoop
Also earnings is definately a part of career expectations. If DL bought Kalitta there's no way a 747 CA making 60K is going to instantly slide into a sub 1000 seniority number and get a 400% increase in compensation like it ain't no thang. They would be stapled or close to it and that would be 100% fair.
09-26-2012, 09:09 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
man, first, why compete!?!? There's no money in competition. We've got to make some sort of deal and allow our passengers to fly on their aircraft and get those 717s out of there.
Win-Win.
71... CRJ-200+++
09-26-2012, 09:13 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
True. Otherwise all we'd have to do is collectively not bid a sisngle 777A position thus letting it go to the plug and presto!...ever merger from then on would be a staple.
Also earnings is definately a part of career expectations. If DL bought Kalitta there's no way a 747 CA making 60K is going to instantly slide into a sub 1000 seniority number and get a 400% increase in compensation like it ain't no thang. They would be stapled or close to it and that would be 100% fair.
Also earnings is definately a part of career expectations. If DL bought Kalitta there's no way a 747 CA making 60K is going to instantly slide into a sub 1000 seniority number and get a 400% increase in compensation like it ain't no thang. They would be stapled or close to it and that would be 100% fair.
09-26-2012, 09:14 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Had that been an MD-88, it'd been done faster and looked better but the bank would be unintentional.
09-26-2012, 09:15 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
Anyway, relative isn't an iron clad precident to be used in all cases like blind lady justice with no regard for any current circumstance. Even DL/NW wasn't totally relative. There was a pull and plug to some degree, some fences and a small staple. While each airline had hiring booms in different years and DL had a more recent mass exodous from the run on the bank class of 2004, any future mergers will have to be handled individually. Relative makes sense to some degree, but it isn't a carved in stone blind lady justice inalienable human right.
In any case, as others have mentioned, there will always be some pilots who feel they didn't get what they deserved or whatever. But before the arbitrated award happens, I expect DALPA to agressively fight like a pitbull for the interests of current DALPA pilots. There's no way HI will end up stapled completely, nor should they. But there's no way we should ignore the reality and the totality of the situation just to display fealty towards a single abstract concept that doesn't universally apply anyway.
09-26-2012, 09:26 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
I thought that the SWA pilots could have forced it to arbitration and since it was a small narrowbody only company merging with a small narrowbody only company that something closer to a relative list would have been the arbitrated result. Even then I would have expected some degree of credit to address the significant income/career expectations of the SWA pilots, but not to the degree that is in place now.
That was a bold move and threat by SWA management that was biased towards their pilots. There is zero chance of DL managemet doing anything like that. Our MEC will walk into RA's office with a copy of the USAToday we learned about the merger from and RA will be all like "oh yeah, about that, do your little ALPA arbitration thingy or whatever, I really don't care."
And in any case AT voted for it in an epic landslide. It wasn't even close. So apparently they felt they got a great deal considering they really did have zero leverage. Or at least they believed so. In any case, and to whatever extent a line pilot thinks something is "fair" or whatever, I clearly do not think a full no questions asked relative integration is fair and I expect DALPA to fight quite a bit harder for DALPA pilots in any such scenario.
The only "gold standard" in airline mergers is a case by case approach that uses all available methods to insure no windfalls at the expense of another keeping realistic career expectations in mind.
Full relative does not apply with DL/HI, nor should it. Some will get it, or close to it, but it is not some noble universal absolute that should never be challenged.
That was a bold move and threat by SWA management that was biased towards their pilots. There is zero chance of DL managemet doing anything like that. Our MEC will walk into RA's office with a copy of the USAToday we learned about the merger from and RA will be all like "oh yeah, about that, do your little ALPA arbitration thingy or whatever, I really don't care."
And in any case AT voted for it in an epic landslide. It wasn't even close. So apparently they felt they got a great deal considering they really did have zero leverage. Or at least they believed so. In any case, and to whatever extent a line pilot thinks something is "fair" or whatever, I clearly do not think a full no questions asked relative integration is fair and I expect DALPA to fight quite a bit harder for DALPA pilots in any such scenario.
The only "gold standard" in airline mergers is a case by case approach that uses all available methods to insure no windfalls at the expense of another keeping realistic career expectations in mind.
Full relative does not apply with DL/HI, nor should it. Some will get it, or close to it, but it is not some noble universal absolute that should never be challenged.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
