What's new

AUG/SEPT 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've always said Nicolau screwed up the WB protection.

If anyone loses relative seniority on a shrinking system it comes at someone's expense. So, when the east loses relative seniority moving forward, who gained?
The zero sum equation relates to people moving up or down a seniority list with a static base denominator. If the denominator changes it has the same basic effect on everyone who is not the number one person on the list. So a shrinking denominator reduces the relative seniority of everyone on the list with no gains to anyone. Likewise, an expanding denominator increases the relative seniority of everyone who was already on the list with no seniority loss to anyone. Simple mathematics.
 
The zero sum equation relates to people moving up or down a seniority list with a static base denominator. If the denominator changes it has the same basic effect on everyone who is not the number one person on the list. So a shrinking denominator reduces the relative seniority of everyone on the list with no gains to anyone. Likewise, an expanding denominator increases the relative seniority of everyone who was already on the list with no seniority loss to anyone. Simple mathematics.

Of course you are correct, but even in a static list the average west relative position will improve with the Nic over time while the average east will decline.
 
How truly amusing....in a rather sad sort of way. Was it not the west's position that any furloughed have not even the slightest value when combining groups?....After all...they don't "bring a job", and should be stapled to the bottom of any combination? So....What's so conveniently and suddenly changed within the west's "moral" position lately?

Wasn't it then/isn't it still "fair and equitable" to place "pilots substantially junior to them" (by even 14+ years!) ahead of them when combining any lists? Some of you folks have some amazingly flexible notions of morality and integrity out there.

Like the INTEGRITY? what a farce. This is what we are dealing with. It is righteous and full of integrity, if it suits them.
 
Seniority isn't measured in years; rather it is measured in terms of a position on a particular list. Combine two lists and both sides get a new number on a new and larger list. The arbitrator did just that because he understands the difference between seniority and other inconsequential measures of a person's tenure in such a case as this.
Had it been a good arbitration, each side would have been equally pissed and we would have gotten a contract by now. If you want the senior's discount at McDonald's, it's measured in years! ....Good coffee!
 
Of course you are correct, but even in a static list the average west relative position will improve with the Nic over time while the average east will decline.
Not sure what you mean by "average" or how a static list harms one group but helps another when they both start out in the same relative slot. For this population a modal average means nothing and an arithmetic mean yields the same mid-point result as an median so we are talking about pilots who are right in the middle of the population. If the denominator remains static such that people who exit the list for whatever reason are replaced by someone with a lower number than they hold, then they either retain the same seniority they had (person exiting below their position so no gain) or they move up because the vacancy was created above them. Thus pilots with seniority numbers 2400 and 2401 by way of example either stay right where they are or they both move up to fill a vacancy. Neither pilot gains faster than the other. Both will stay at number 2400/2401 or they will both move up to 2401/2402 or whatever. This will remain the case until one or both of those pilots exits the list themselves at which point seniority becomes a non-issue for the terminated pilot unless they are going to harbor bad feelings for years post termination.
 
Had it been a good arbitration, each side would have been equally pissed and we would have gotten a contract by now. If you want the senior's discount at McDonald's, it's measured in years! ....Good coffee!
So, you want to equate a labor group's seniority list to a person's age? A 59-year-old new hire pilot should be placed in a more senior position than the 49-year-old pilot who has been working the line for twenty years? Good luck with that.
 
Not sure what you mean by "average" or how a static list harms one group but helps another when they both start out in the same relative slot. For this population a modal average means nothing and an arithmetic mean yields the same mid-point result as an median so we are talking about pilots who are right in the middle of the population. If the denominator remains static such that people who exit the list for whatever reason are replaced by someone with a lower number than they hold, then they either retain the same seniority they had (person exiting below their position so no gain) or they move up because the vacancy was created above them. Thus pilots with seniority numbers 2400 and 2401 by way of example either stay right where they are or they both move up to fill a vacancy. Neither pilot gains faster than the other. Both will stay at number 2400/2401 or they will both move up to 2401/2402 or whatever. This will remain the case until one or both of those pilots exits the list themselves at which point seniority becomes a non-issue for the terminated pilot unless they are going to harbor bad feelings for years post termination.
Nicolau vs. standalone, the overall the west relative position improves over time while the east's declines. Of course, it's the same in reverse with DOH, until a few years down the road.
 
So, you want to equate a labor group's seniority list to a person's age? A 59-year-old new hire pilot should be placed in a more senior position than the 49-year-old pilot who has been working the line for twenty years? Good luck with that.
I did not say that at all. Post for fun and don't get all upset. Cheers!
 
That was my question. just in the last 2 pages of the thread we have west guys saying "furloughees do not bring anything to a merger" AND stating that "they are outraged that furloughees are not included in a merger" Their opinion flip flops depending in the discussion being about east furloughs or west furloughs.

Will everybody please stick to one "moral high ground" please. this constant flip flopping is making me think I am reading a thread on the presidental race! 🙂

"Will everybody please stick to one "moral high ground" please."

Indeed 😉 Ya' just couldn't make this stuff up.
 
So, you want to equate a labor group's seniority list to a person's age? A 59-year-old new hire pilot should be placed in a more senior position than the 49-year-old pilot who has been working the line for twenty years? Good luck with that.

So you want outside entities to "equate" a labor group's seniority with intangebles like "career expectations" rather than my 26 years of uninterrupted service with your pilots 7 years of service? We brought value through sacrifice. Ask Parker. I guess there will be a lot more sacrifice. I can tell you this: until I hear from the APA how they feel about seniority I'm not walking their picket line. From their past it looks like they're not getting a whole lot of support from former TWA/CAL/Reno pilots either.

Strength through unity? (uniform, united, union, uni = ONE?)

I think the best to be played out is yet to come and the only eventual solution is a regulatory one where the pilots are nationalized.
 
Can it be any other way when the top 517 positions were given to the East?

Careful there Jake...lest some people might mistake that as an implication of irrational irregularities (or even...gasp!... some slight indictment) of the obvious and clear perfection that's unquestionably evidenced within the currently fashionable arbitration process. 😉
 
So, you want to equate a labor group's seniority list to a person's age? A 59-year-old new hire pilot should be placed in a more senior position than the 49-year-old pilot who has been working the line for twenty years? Good luck with that.
Don't you like McDonald's coffee?
 
I did not say that at all. Post for fun and don't get all upset. Cheers!
This is fun; not upset in the least.

Does McDonald's offer their senior discounts to people based on anything other than their age? I believe age is their sole criteria and that was the analogy you used. So it seemed reasonable that you were proposing we toss all other factors besides age out of the SLI discussion. Nicolau used seniority (not DOH/LOS) to integrate the two seniority lists. What a radical concept using seniority as the criteria to integrate seniority lists. Who would have ever imagined a foreign but thoroughly logical concept such as this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top