Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
hum.. why couldn't the East guys just be slotted in based on actual service at USAirways... (and include MDA time!).. so lets say you have a pilot hired in 1994, laid of in 2002, sent to MDA in 2003, laid off from MDA in 2005, so he'd have 10 years of seniority...
or does ALPA like to complicate things???
===========================================================
In other words, the only fair seniority integration is one where I am ahead of you. Is that your position in a nutshell?
I'll ask again since none of the turquois apologists will answer: Just how many jobs out of the 850 odd positions lost to the last man on the AAA list did AWA bring? I am guessing 4/9--meaning that the AWA FOs got all the benefit.
Your question isn't really coherent, but you seem to be asking who brought what to the table. I'll explain it this way: (1) AAA brought 2600 cockpit positions; (2) AWA brought 1850; (3) Most, if not all AWA pilots moved backwards in their respective percentile based on 4450 cockpit jobs; (4) all international flying was cordoned off until 2011. So, AWA pilots moved backwards and AAA pilots moved forwards in percentile. AWA lost and AAA won.
Your question isn't really coherent, but you seem to be asking who brought what to the table. I'll explain it this way: (1) AAA brought 2600 cockpit positions; (2) AWA brought 1850; (3) Most, if not all AWA pilots moved backwards in their respective percentile based on 4450 cockpit jobs; (4) all international flying was cordoned off until 2011. So, AWA pilots moved backwards and AAA pilots moved forwards in percentile. AWA lost and AAA won.
Allow me to play devil's advocate for a minute.
Without being an expert, or even informed on this issue except for what I am reading here, let me pose the following questions:
1. Is there ANY WAY to overturn, modify or get around this ruling? For example can a new contract set seniority rules contrary to this? Can they be negotiated?
2. Am I correct in assuming like many said that the company and west pilots really had nothing to do with this ruling? Is it in fact the judgement of an "impartial" third party?
3. If this was due to negligence on the part of ALPA or other negotiating parties, then wouldn't there be legal recourse?
4. If the above is true, then what good does it do to call in sick, hurt the operation and drive what few high value customers are left after the meltdowns away? We already have good enough reasons to leave...what can driving the company out of business achieve?
It looks like no matter which way this went someone would be unhappy. To take it out on innocent customers, however, is somewhat unfair. Instead of spending all the energy being spent on complaining and protesting, how about finding a way to fix it? (This may be naive but had to be asked).
And don't blame us for driving fares down.....those of us who fly for business are subsidizing the Kettle family BIG time.
My best to you all....
Allow me to play devil's advocate for a minute.
Without being an expert, or even informed on this issue except for what I am reading here, let me pose the following questions:
1. Is there ANY WAY to overturn, modify or get around this ruling? For example can a new contract set seniority rules contrary to this? Can they be negotiated?
What exactly is fanciful about it...?Fanciful thinking Rico. "Gee, if I just run away to Mexico, they'll never find me there and I'll never have to serve my time..." Trust me, your desperate search for a way out of this won't be fruitful. It's over. It would be a lot better for the AAA MEC to fess up what their lawyers have already told them by now: it's done.