SWAPA TA Failure and downgrades

[firstthird]

I wish he would have spoken up a little earlier.

me too. the no vote might have been bigger.

 

[PCL_128]

Why are you worried about domestic code share? If SWA management was going to enter into domestic code share arrangements, they would have done it long ago. It's important to have those protections in whatever contract you get, but your priority right now should be locking them out of international code share before it gets too big. Your flying is being stolen from you and you're being distracted by the red herring of domestic code share.

 

[PropPiedmont]

...Or maybe we'll be told that the economic conditions are completely different now then they were when the raises were negotiated (oh wait, Gary has already said that, hasn't he? Not a chance his negotiating team will say it too, now is there?) and if we want that, we have to give up this.

Well, there you go. There's the answer to your concerns about the downgrades. It's not because of the TA rejection, but due to the economic conditions. Calm down Tanker.

 

[shearedshaft]

Well it sounds like you are falling for every single management trick in the book and was just wondering if this was your first airline or not. So is this your first airline?

What trick have I fallen for? SWA is very happy that they don't have to pay out retro and higher wages for the pilots right now. Is that a management trick?

I read the Dallas news when Gary Kelly was reported saying that regarding the pilot contract, we're in new economic times. You seriously think I'm wrong about our new NC (may they show up soon) won't hear the same thing the CEO is in the newspaper saying about his own negotiating plans? Christ, he said it out loud, I have a fair idea that their position is the following:

1. Be really nice to the pilots
2. Drag their feet
3. Say, "These are tough economic times" over and over
4. Finally agree to something at least a year from now, if not two years.

Maybe I'm wrong, but who give a whip if I am or not? I'm just making a prediction that you guys cost me a bagload of money.

So far, I haven't heard a single person argue differently, so I'm all ears.

Why would the company give us bigger raises and retro right now, given the choice not to? I could see them honoring a prior commitment (hey, Gary Kelly said that too), but I can see them attempting to not make a new commitment.

What does that equal? A long time to a new contract. Will we get retro and as big raises? Will we get bigger ones? Will he want concessions to keep from furloughing? I dunno. Do you?

 

[shearedshaft]

Well, there you go. There's the answer to your concerns about the downgrades. It's not because of the TA rejection, but due to the economic conditions. Calm down Tanker.

No argument. Downgrades are unrelated to the contract. (BTW, your Tanker Clown insult was the only one to get under my skin, so congrats, he's a d o u c h e bag).

My point was that voting no to grandfather the lances is fast becoming moot, the lance population will look a lot different by the time a new TA is presented than it did at the last TA.

 

[CaptSeth]

Why are you worried about domestic code share? If SWA management was going to enter into domestic code share arrangements, they would have done it long ago. It's important to have those protections in whatever contract you get, but your priority right now should be locking them out of international code share before it gets too big. Your flying is being stolen from you and you're being distracted by the red herring of domestic code share.

You remember ATA? I do.

Anyway, this is fun to watch. TIMMMBBBBERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[shearedshaft]

Why are you worried about domestic code share? If SWA management was going to enter into domestic code share arrangements, they would have done it long ago. It's important to have those protections in whatever contract you get, but your priority right now should be locking them out of international code share before it gets too big. Your flying is being stolen from you and you're being distracted by the red herring of domestic code share.

Because we're an all-domestic airline. RJs would fit nicely into some bean-counter's plans between many of our smaller stations that don't fly full.

We don't fly internationally. I would like us to do all that flying. But, nobody asked me. Canada is the size of the NY metropolitan area, passenger-wise, Mexico is devolving into a third-world hellhole. In the near-term, I'm not worried about Canada and Mexico.

But the proposed TA had SWAPA veto power for all other international codeshare. So proposed TA: no domestic, veto on international that doesn't include near international.

Current status quo? No restrictions on domestic, no restrictions on near-international, no restrictions on international.

So again, how is the TA worse than status quo?

But of course, nobody is answering my questions, because the answer is too uncomfortable for you.

 

[shearedshaft]

double post

 

[PCL_128]

Because we're an all-domestic airline.

You miss the whole WestJet and Volaris thing? That's the future of SWA growth.

In the near-term, I'm not worried about Canada and Mexico.

Sounds awfully familiar.

Legacy pilot circa early '90s: "In the near term, I'm not worried about a few little 50-seat RJs flying around. Leave it to the scooter trash."

That worked out well, didn't it? Your management has shown a propensity for wanting to outsource your international growth. You'd better stop it before it's too late.

But the proposed TA had SWAPA veto power for all other international codeshare. So proposed TA: no domestic, veto on international that doesn't include near international.

Near international is probably the only growth you can expect during the term of this agreement.

So again, how is the TA worse than status quo?

Management is stuck dealing with uncertainty right now. They know that if they expand code-share too much right now, then they'll be dealing with a nightmare self-help scenario when the pilot group revolts to stop it before it's too late. On the other hand, if they can bribe you to accept a TA with crappy international scope but no domestic code share (something they don't care about anyway), then they'll have several years under the new agreement to build up the international code share so it's too late for you to stop it by the time the next contract negotiations come around.

You're playing checkers while management is playing chess. Think!

 

[shearedshaft]

You miss the whole WestJet and Volaris thing? That's the future of SWA growth.



Sounds awfully familiar.

Legacy pilot circa early '90s: "In the near term, I'm not worried about a few little 50-seat RJs flying around. Leave it to the scooter trash."

That worked out well, didn't it? Your management has shown a propensity for wanting to outsource your international growth. You'd better stop it before it's too late.



Near international is probably the only growth you can expect during the term of this agreement.



Management is stuck dealing with uncertainty right now. They know that if they expand code-share too much right now, then they'll be dealing with a nightmare self-help scenario when the pilot group revolts to stop it before it's too late. On the other hand, if they can bribe you to accept a TA with crappy international scope but no domestic code share (something they don't care about anyway), then they'll have several years under the new agreement to build up the international code share so it's too late for you to stop it by the time the next contract negotiations come around.

You're playing checkers while management is playing chess. Think!

You make very good points, except for one important one: You propose self-help is a realistic outcome that might happen after a vote is lost with less than a one percent failing margin?

If this thing would have failed 70/30, I wouldn't be writing this, because I would have assumed I just didn't understand what is going on. But not with this margin. Instead, I think a lot of guys voted no because nobody ever bothered to tell them the "why" behind stuff in the changes. As I said, I had to figure them out on my own, on a long-haul with the new TA in hand.

Everyone, from the union to management just left us to figure out what they were trying to get done without saying anything about the matter.

If I were the company, I would be worried about exactly what you said. But not very worried. They got a 50% solution instead of the 51% solution. Self-help is not right around the corner.

And both Canada and Mexico are small. I wish we'd fly there though. But the danger (in my opinion, only time will tell) lies within the heart of what we do every day, which is fly point-to-point in the US, the danger doesn't lie in taking away something we don't even do yet.

How many flights do you think we're really giving up to Canada? To Mexico? Would I vote to go on strike over it? Nope. Would the no voters? I don't know.

Let's ask them. Would you go on strike to keep near-international from happening?

 

[PCL_128]

You make very good points, except for one important one: You propose self-help is a realistic outcome that might happen after a vote is lost with less than a one percent failing margin?

I believe the margin would be a lot higher if taken today. Now that the pilots have seen that a lot of other pilots voted no, I think a lot of guys that were on the fence and ended up voting yes would probably vote no if given the chance to do it over again. Pilot psychology is a weird thing, and it takes a lot of union work to start to figure it out.

How many flights do you think we're really giving up to Canada? To Mexico? Would I vote to go on strike over it? Nope.

It amazes me that you've learned nothing from the past 20+ years of scope losses. Your attitude is exactly why more than half of UAL and DAL flying is done by other than DAL and UAL pilots.

Since you have such a fundamental lack of understanding, I'm left to ask the same thing as the other posters here: what is your background in aviation? Did you come from a unionized part 121 carrier? Did you only fly non-union non-sked maybe?

 

[shearedshaft]

I believe the margin would be a lot higher if taken today. Now that the pilots have seen that a lot of other pilots voted no, I think a lot of guys that were on the fence and ended up voting yes would probably vote no if given the chance to do it over again. Pilot psychology is a weird thing, and it takes a lot of union work to start to figure it out.



It amazes me that you've learned nothing from the past 20+ years of scope losses. Your attitude is exactly why more than half of UAL and DAL flying is done by other than DAL and UAL pilots.

Since you have such a fundamental lack of understanding, I'm left to ask the same thing as the other posters here: what is your background in aviation? Did you come from a unionized part 121 carrier? Did you only fly non-union non-sked maybe?

Nope, ALPA for years. They did a great job on scope. The APA over at American did too.

Like I said, our current contract has zero scope protection. Our negotiated one had pretty good scope and codeshare protection, except for limiting the already signed contracts (remember, our current contract had no restrictions, they went and signed on the dotted line, nothing we could do about it) to 6% of our overall seat miles.

Not a worthwhile restriction, since the whole Canada/Mexico/Island market is less than 6% of our capacity regardless.

So I'll answer the question a different way: Would I vote to go on strike over an agreement that completely limited domestic, completely eliminated far-international and limited near-international to only 6%? No I wouldn't.

Outsourcing sucks. So let's limit it. Status quo is zero limit, the TA had significant limits. So you choose status quo? "Yeah Bob, I'll take zero restrictions for $1,000 per month!"

And I think you're wrong. If the contract was presented again, in its current form, I think it would pass handily. The no voters are the dog that caught the station wagon. Now they have it, what next? Well, no raises and a new, untrained NC to start.

But maybe SWA will fall over in trembling fear and we'll cancel our codeshare agreements with Westjet and Volaris because the pilots voted no by 100 votes.

Or maybe the opposite will happen, they'll take the fact the pilots turned down a chance to restrict codeshare, and we'll see RJs in Houston. They've changed their minds five or six times in the last year, why not one more?

If you honestly think "growth" for SWA is near-international, you've never seen the population maps airlines use for route planning.

And by the way, you talk about "more than half" of flying for UAL and DAL being done by non-mainline pilots. Right, that's my point. RJs fill the ramps like maggots. Our TA would have cut that off at the knees, no RJs at all. That's a good thing.

Right now? Any amount of RJs at any time.

 

[PCL_128]

He's all yours, fellas. I'm done with him. He's obviously hopeless and clueless. I'm sorry you've got to deal with him.

 

[Herkdrv]

What trick have I fallen for? SWA is very happy that they don't have to pay out retro and higher wages for the pilots right now. Is that a management trick?

I read the Dallas news when Gary Kelly was reported saying that regarding the pilot contract, we're in new economic times. You seriously think I'm wrong about our new NC (may they show up soon) won't hear the same thing the CEO is in the newspaper saying about his own negotiating plans? Christ, he said it out loud, I have a fair idea that their position is the following:

1. Be really nice to the pilots
2. Drag their feet
3. Say, "These are tough economic times" over and over
4. Finally agree to something at least a year from now, if not two years.

Maybe I'm wrong, but who give a whip if I am or not? I'm just making a prediction that you guys cost me a bagload of money.

So far, I haven't heard a single person argue differently, so I'm all ears.

Why would the company give us bigger raises and retro right now, given the choice not to? I could see them honoring a prior commitment (hey, Gary Kelly said that too), but I can see them attempting to not make a new commitment.

What does that equal? A long time to a new contract. Will we get retro and as big raises? Will we get bigger ones? Will he want concessions to keep from furloughing? I dunno. Do you?

So once again what is your background?

 

[njcapt]

I think it's Tom Dean.

 

[CaptWidgeon]

I think it's Tom Dean.

or maybe huffman???

 

[luckytohaveajob]

So once again what is your background?

His background is probably not some management toe jam sucking robot with a cookie cutter life who has followed the program every second of his life. He has probably made a decision or two without being told what to do or programmed to do it.

Question: How did an academy grad such as yourself end up flying Herks? Let me guess your a special forces Herk pilot? Special like the Olympics.

Did you know 80% of SWA pilots are military? If you answered yes, you'd be wrong. Your 100% civilian! So take your military background and stick it where the sun doesn't shine or keep the lid on your closet don't ask don't tell shower with the guys weekend warrior games because in your corn dog suit your just another civilian with bad breath.

I'd hate to see you buying a new car? I know you pay sticker!

 

[Daddy]

Shearedshaft,
If you have been here long enough to get weekends off and STILL haven't figured out how to ELITT your way to get premium time flying even now, then there is nothing I can do to explain it to you. If you thought you would be ELITTing during the week after those measures, you are just not being realistic. It just aint that hard to do, man. You sound pretty gullible, dude...you must have some of that "artificial" seniority in LAS to where you never had to crack the system to make it work for you. That's too bad...for you and us.

 

[murano]

He's all yours, fellas. I'm done with him. He's obviously hopeless and clueless. I'm sorry you've got to deal with him.

We've got thousands of them here. Slowly but surely we'll get to all of them. At least 50.84% is now educated.

 

[Skybus]

How to become a "Real" Airline

Is there any reason why as SWA Pilots we need to air this dirty laundry on this public forum? Do you have such a need for the entire avaition community to hear you. Need you show the entire world how brilliant your thoughts are? NOT!

Like the TA or not, take it home. Give it a rest.

BUS

 

[Sandhawk]

His background is probably not some management toe jam sucking robot with a cookie cutter life who has followed the program every second of his life. He has probably made a decision or two without being told what to do or programmed to do it.

Question: How did an academy grad such as yourself end up flying Herks? Let me guess your a special forces Herk pilot? Special like the Olympics.

Did you know 80% of SWA pilots are military? If you answered yes, you'd be wrong. Your 100% civilian! So take your military background and stick it where the sun doesn't shine or keep the lid on your closet don't ask don't tell shower with the guys weekend warrior games because in your corn dog suit your just another civilian with bad breath.

I'd hate to see you buying a new car? I know you pay sticker!

Dang, Lucky - Tell us how you really feel !!!

:laugh:

 

[GuppyWN]

well, real quick, show me the part in the contract that says they get to "stay" lances.

I'll be waiting.

P.S. I'll save you time, in the past they have allowed it, but it's not contractual. Since they're so enamored with the program, I'm sure they'll just let us double the lance size. Yep.

I haven't read the entire thread yet but let me point a couple things out.

We have been overmanned on the captain side for quite a while. When you're VJA'ing FO's and letting captains sit reserve for days on end without flying - that's lopsided.

Secondly, If the company has "allowed it in the past," that's a little thing called PRECEDENCE my friend.

gup

 

[GuppyWN]

There are exactly zero scope restrictions in the current contract, so your question is hard to answer.

Except the whole "the company must grow the fleet by 5% annually if any codeshare is on property" thingy?

Gup

 

[Herkdrv]

His background is probably not some management toe jam sucking robot with a cookie cutter life who has followed the program every second of his life. He has probably made a decision or two without being told what to do or programmed to do it.

Question: How did an academy grad such as yourself end up flying Herks? Let me guess your a special forces Herk pilot? Special like the Olympics.

Did you know 80% of SWA pilots are military? If you answered yes, you'd be wrong. Your 100% civilian! So take your military background and stick it where the sun doesn't shine or keep the lid on your closet don't ask don't tell shower with the guys weekend warrior games because in your corn dog suit your just another civilian with bad breath.

I'd hate to see you buying a new car? I know you pay sticker!

Holy cow Lucky take a step back for a second! I was not asking for his background because I'm interested in a civilian vs military pissing contest. I was asking what his background was because I was interested to see if this was his first airline experience. In fact if I was a betting man, I would have bet retired military who is going through his first contract negotiation. Decaf my friend does wonders!

 

[pilotyip]

Could it be SWA is in trouble? Right around TA rejection time SWA raised their advance tickets prices to nearly the highest in the industry, two weeks later they dropped them and then again last week they dropped them again. Probably finding higher price reduced yields. Could it be they are trying to raise additional money to give everyone what they want, but a finding resistance from the consuming public? I see they are now charging for baggage and changing flights as a source of additional revenue.

 

[shearedshaft]

Except the whole "the company must grow the fleet by 5% annually if any codeshare is on property" thingy?

Gup

...and if they don't they have to meet with the union and explain why.

Have you read SL32? There is no remedy for failure to grow, plus there's an additional out if they are in debilitating circumstances.\

Have you thought this all the way through? We grieve it, the company refuses to meet with the union to explain why they're not growing and the arbitrator says that we're not in debilitating circumstances.

So the arbitrator forces Gary Kelly to grow? How does he do that?

But it's a moot point, there isn't anything to grieve, all they have to do it meet and explain.

I voted no all over that thang, but it still passed.

 

[shearedshaft]

Holy cow Lucky take a step back for a second! I was not asking for his background because I'm interested in a civilian vs military pissing contest. I was asking what his background was because I was interested to see if this was his first airline experience. In fact if I was a betting man, I would have bet retired military who is going through his first contract negotiation. Decaf my friend does wonders!

This is interesting. I've written perhaps 1,000 words, explaining quite clearly why I think the no vote left me, and the pilot group, significantly worse off.

To counter this, I've been called names, asked what my background is (in an oddly aggressive fashion by Mr. Air Force Guy, have we flown together? Never mind, it was probably one of your 40 clones who ask, "So, what's your background?")

But not one of you has offered a single reason as to why we are suddenly better off, other than to close your eyes real hard and wish, wish, wish.

Here are some points:

1. Restricting ELITT weekends helps the senior guys who fly during the week make use of ELITT.
2. Restricting number of lance duty periods to nine helps FOs use ELITT, net zero will go positive for once
3. Restricting first year guys to only getting second-year pay above their line total helps FOs who use ELITT, because they won't dump trips
4. Reducing the lance captain program by half won't change lance giveaways, because there aren't even enough turn lines to fill up 3.2%
5. Grandfathering lances is moot, downgrades are taking care of that
6. The payraises were fine, ranging from 6% to 10% in the worst recession in 50 years.
7. The TA offered restrictions on domestic codeshare and RJs which don't exist in our contract and are welcome.
8. The TA restricts far-international codeshare completely, like domestic.
9. The TA changes JA pay to double time
10. The TA changed overfly pay to only five minutes.

So again, where is all of the heartache coming from? Is it from the weekend guys who feel entitled to use ELITT to screw the weekday fliers? Is it from guys who want 15% raises instead of 10%?

 

[firstthird]

shearedshaft,
if you are a SWA pilot, then get on the pprune or swapa to discuss the particulars. I'm done explaining the obvious to you. I'll do it on a more union specific website. I'm not sure why you are on here getting into pretty in depth particulars that have no real relevance outside of internal SWA pilot negotations but I'm done playing your game and I hope the rest of the SWA pilots will agree. I'm on the pprune as firstthird. I know, original. and I'm on the swapa forum too. maybe you're on there, there seem to be plenty of fear seller there too.
FI is a great place for some stuff but you are beyond that line.
firstthird

 

[shearedshaft]

I'm up to 1,100 words on this subject, on the fourth page of this thread and not one single cogent response from a no voter.

Face it, you were the dog chasing the garbage truck, you finally bit onto the rear bumper and have zero idea what to do next. The SWAPA forum is oddly silent (I don't PPrune) and here, all you guys can do is to call names.

Turning down codeshare restrictions and large raises in this economy is going to be looked on by history as the personification of hubris.

 

[firstthird]

the swapa forum is not silent. I've slapped every yes voter on there upside the head at least once. okay, maybe not slapped, but frankly the only yes voters still posting on there are a lot like you, difficult to reason with since they mainly repeat company talking points.

and like I said, you want to come post this stuff on a swa pilot only forum, I'll gladly answer you. in fact I probably have already if you are who I suspect you are. there is one fairly vocal yes voter still selling his fear over on swapa, is that you shearedshaft? not getting the response you want on swapa so you're trolling flightinfo? and that isn't name calling, just asking a question. I don't think I've called you a name yet, althogh I keep having do backspace a bunch.