SWAPA/ATN: Why no JCBA?

[Lear70]

Piedmont and USAir were two of the better airlines in the country, until they merged that is.

True that. My dad was 23 years at USAirways, hired in '81, prior to Piedmont.

It was never the same airline after that, even as a kid growing up I could sense the tension in CLT, kind of a North/South thing, for nearly a decade.

Of course, the entire industry has changed (in my opinion, for the worse) over the years, which didn't help people's attitudes any, but the Piedmont/USAirways merger, while financially good for the companies at the time and the decade or so after that, certainly did nothing for the culture of the company.

I certainly hope to avoid that here, and end up with the Southwest culture when all is said and done. The vast majority of the AirTran pilots have that same "can-do" spirit (it got me in a lot of trouble at AirTran, actually), and I think with a little cultivating, that will be easy to draw back out of the employee group at AirTran. Just have to get past the growing pains...

 

[Cometman]

Bottom line is, if you think the SWA "culture" is important, this merger could easily ruin it if either group feels shafted.
It seems a lot on here are bashing the SWA folks, but from the side lines I can see their point. I would be upset too with AT guys slotting in ahead of me with a much latter date of hire. It would also be equally unfair for a SWA FO to think he should be taking an AirTran Captains seat.
Seems to me the way to go would be some kind of ratio formula with fences. Reality will probably be that it won't be the same SWA and they are testing uncharted waters. New culture and head to head competition with the legacies, who are becoming much stronger than they were in the past.
Piedmont and USAir were two of the better airlines in the country, until they merged that is.

Bottom line is, if you think the SWA "culture" is important, this merger could easily ruin it if either group feels shafted.

Especially if SWAPA is shafted. From reading here on FI I would think only half of the Airtran would be upset. like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys. So would SWA rather have 800 guys upset or 6800?

 

[27 driver]

Nope. All future growth will be on the SWA side.

And you know this for sure. There is no legal loophole to be exploited. I would bet there is. Once again I am not saying that will happen. I am saying it could.

 

[Dan Roman]

Nope. All future growth will be on the SWA side.

I would think if one side had lower operating costs than the other, it is the side with the lowest costs that would grow, other wise they could risk stock holder lawsuits.

 

[Lear70]

From reading here on FI I would think only half of the Airtran would be upset. like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

During T.A.'s 1 and 2, a good 1/3 to 1/2 of the senior pilots voted NO on a T.A. that would have given them pay raises but shafted the F/O's, partially because of Scope and work rule give-backs, but also, in large, because the F/O's were getting shafted.

Not to get into an argument about what T.A. 3 (technically 4) is doing to the senior guys, but the point is that the senior pilots don't ALL just have the "ME" attitude. Quite a few of them have proven just the opposite.

Carry on...

 

[Cruncher]

What are the big difference between TA 3 and TA 4? Can you post a wavetop recap?

 

[FlyinGuy]

And you know this for sure. There is no legal loophole to be exploited. I would bet there is. Once again I am not saying that will happen. I am saying it could.

It is in the SWAPA contract. SWA will not be able to grow AT without growing SWA at the 3.6:1 ratio. I can guarantee you that SWAPA will not relieve that portion of the contract. So if SWA tries to grow AT without growing SWA, they will be in violation of our CBA. Hats off to the guys who had the foresight to negotiate this several years ago.

 

[27 driver]

It is in the SWAPA contract. SWA will not be able to grow AT without growing SWA at the 3.6:1 ratio. I can guarantee you that SWAPA will not relieve that portion of the contract. So if SWA tries to grow AT without growing SWA, they will be in violation of our CBA. Hats off to the guys who had the foresight to negotiate this several years ago.

Sounds like a good clause. I guess the devil is in the details.

 

[GuppyWN]

Several years ago? WTF dude? It's in SL6 that hasn't even passed yet. It's 3.61:1 PRE transaction ratio of Tranny shiny jets vs. WN shiny jets. But let's be honest here. WN is getting all of the shiny new Tranny jets next year so that ratio will be lopsided from the git go.

Gup

 

[Ty Webb]

like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys. So would SWA rather have 800 guys upset or 6800?

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

 

[Lear70]

What are the big difference between TA 3 and TA 4? Can you post a wavetop recap?

They're calling the current T.A. #3, but there was an unofficial T.A. 3 a month after T.A. 2 died about 3 1/2 years ago (so I jokingly refer to this one as T.A. 4). T.A. 3 (or 2.5 or whatever someone wants to call it) never made it past the NPA NC and Board, thus most pilots don't know it even existed (and technically it didn't).

There's another thread that was going about it a couple pages back now with some of the differences posted there.

 

[Cometman]

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

It must be a sore spot with you for you to get so upset. relax.

 

[carl p]

AT pilots have shown on multiple occasions that they care about the entire group, much like SWA I'm sure. When we were furloughed in before the holidays in 07, they donated money to a furloughed pilot fund, bought toys for furloughed pilot's kids, and created a fund to support contract hostages, all in addition to what Ty mentioned.

One of our senior Capt's personally sent my family gift cards valued at hundreds of dollars to help with Thanksgiving and Christmas. I can honestly say that the AT group is a loyal, fun, and professional group of aviators.

 

[27 driver]

Amen Carl P. I was one of those unlucky club 169 members and I also received help from some of our generous Captains and Fo's. I will correct you on your dates though it was 08. CJ spearheaded that program and called all of us personally. We do have a good group. Not to say we don't have our token 10% but all in all a great bunch of guys and gals.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

Hahaha. What a load of BS. You AT captains are the greediest lot I've ever seen.

Prove that you're not just in it for you and advocate a staple, because to all of us outsiders, that would clearly be the best SLI for the sake of the airline.