You really seem to have a problem with seniority based pay. What is wrong with someone getting compensated based on their length of service? Believe it or not, there are people who choose to stay at one company because they are dedicated and expect to be rewarded for their dedication. Unlike some CEOs and other execs.
And if it means getting the first pick at a job slot, vacation, days off, etc because of one's seniority,so be it.
You do not seem to have no problem with a CEO being given several times credit to his/her actual years of service. But in your eyes, that is "creative compensation."
Remember Carty?
Lots to address...
1)
Seniority based pay... Never have I said there's a problem with longevity of service being reflected in one's pay. I just don't think it should be the only factor in determining someone's pay.
Someone significantly more qualified & experienced in their craft should be able to be brought in at a rate of pay that reflects their skills, even if it means paying them more than a less experienced guy who has been there longer.
Unionism as we know it in the US airlines prevents that. Why shouldn't AA have been able to bring in former BN or EA mechanics at a fair wage, as opposed to the bottom rung on the seniority ladder?
For that matter, why shouldn't an Eagle employee get the benefit of their AMR seniority when they cross over to AA, and vice versa?
2)
Seniority based privileges... Absolutely, the guy who has been there longer should be able to have first pick at shifts, days off, and vacations. Again, never have I said otherwise. Likewise for layoffs, with one caveat -- unique skills or licenses deserve some protection, including languages for employees who come in contact with customers.
3)
C-suite length of service. Since the CEO, CMO, CFO, CIO, etc. are usually a single position, does it really matter what their years of service are? It's not like they're going to bump someone when it comes time for layoff, and since execs don't fly space available, they wouldn't be bumping employees if AA had a seniority based nonrev priority. It may have gotten them a bit more pension credit in the days of executive pensions (which haven't been available to new management employees since 2000), but that's about it.
As much as you want to villify Carty, if you measure one's dedication by years of service, don't overlook the fact Carty worked for AMR for more than 20 actual years.
He was already a VP at AMR when they made the decision to buy the MD80 in 1980, left in 1985 for a job at CP, and returned to AMR from 1987 to 2003.
Guys like Glenn Tilton? Sure. They don't deserve the recognition that a date of hire brings them, but the fact is that he'd still make just as much money with or without the adjusted seniority date.
What ironic in all this discussion of seniority, Hopeful, is that it's commonplace outside the airlines to recognize seniority for many of the things you mention. When my IT company moved into a new building, seniority dictated who got first pick of offices. It's also used for a tie-breaker when two people want the same week off. And we have absolutely no reason to be looking at airline union contracts to determine our HR policies...
With regard to the original discussion on DL.... Don't flatter yourselves too much.
Just as a realtor has to compare the prices of new construction and foreclosures/short sales when they look at pricing their own listings, employers look at their competition, regardless if the competitions have unions or not.
I'd be shocked if DL didn't also compare pay at Jetblue, Spirit, and Airtran as well as the WN, CO, UA and AA. We know that AA does.
