SWAPA calls all former AirTran pilots

[dicko]

Lear, I think your MC left out a few steps.

1. SWA forms Guadalupe Holdings,
2. Guadalupe Holdings purchases AirTran,
3. Guadalupe Holdings merges with AirTran and retains the AirTran name,
4. SWA forms Sub LLC,
5. Sub LLC merges with AirTran (formerly Guadalupe Holdings) and retains the AirTran name,
6. AirTran (Sub LLC) is a wholly owned of Southwest Airlines in a similar setup to American Eagle and American or formerly Comair and Delta.

This was laid out on Sep 26 2010 as the plan of the merger. In both documents 'AirTran' becomes a subsidiary of SWA.

In the new Merger document AirTran is merged into and with a LLC. The LLC subsidiary becomes the surviving company.

 

[texman]

Your right dicko. It went from a tax shell to a new llc. Post merger transaction. So we end up with what CO had with express jet. This is out of swapa control.

 

[texman]

I can see the haters coming

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

If the swa pilots case is so strong, why all the nervous chatter? Seems that in y'alls eyes it is a slam dunk. How could an independent arbitrator not see that?

 

[redflyer65]

We have ironclad domestic codeshare protection. I believe it will then be the function of the fences to come.

It will be up to SWAPA to release (temporarily) the codeshare relief for XX number of years and possibly re-visit it later. I would think there will be no relief from the CRJ portion. Something like "all CRJ flying will stop within 90 days of this agreement".

This is going to be interesting no doubt.

 

[texman]

The problem is a arbitration will never come. The reason why is you can't force arbitration if the sub doesn't merge into swa. If so AM/BM will apply, not nervous here.

 

[dicko]

Your right dicko. It went from a tax shell to a new llc. Post merger transaction. So we end up with what CO had with express jet. This is out of swapa control.

I think you misunderstood me. I can't see any change in the process from the Sep 26 document with regard to the LLC. It's the same plan.

What's changed ?

 

[texman]

I think you misunderstood me. I can't see any change in the process from the Sep 26 document with regard to the LLC. It's the same plan.

What's changed ?

The reason I brought all this up, is the LLC will not be part of our Ops. It will be separate for a long time. So what is the point of a SLI. All I see is a merger of AT into a sub LLC that has no planes or crew.

So all this talk on FI is pointless.

 

[formerdal]

You guys are absolutely ridiculous! Southwest is one sharp operator (no I do not work there) they aren't going to create a subsidiary where all the pilots are pissed off and therefore jeopardize their operation.

Airtran WILL get merged into your operation and there will be some equitable SLI. To think otherwise is lunacy!

Good luck children.

 

[FIREMAN]

Laura Wright– Southwest Airlines Co. – SVP Finance and CFO
Okay, so the question I think was how we see the Company evolving post-AirTran over the next two to three years.
Certainly, AirTran is going to be our significant — it's going to be a significant effort for us.
When we close, we anticipate we will have two separate airlines, but over time we will transition into one airline, one brand, one product. That's probably going to take two to three years.
We are very excited about the acquisition because we think AirTran brings a lot of things to Southwest. Certainly, Atlanta was an important, important piece to us. It's an airport that has limited access, and AirTran has a great presence there.
With Atlanta, we're going to be able to do a lot more with the rest of the Southwest network. For example, there's a lot of cities that AirTran doesn't serve out of Atlanta where Southwest has a huge presence. So we see opportunities there.
AirTran gives us more access to some places we couldn't get into, like Washington Reagan, so we're going to be picking up some flight activity there. It also allows us to grow our presence at New York LaGuardia with the slots that they have.
So, but I think for you to think about bigger picture is we will have a larger network. We will have more cities and the value that you get when you bring those together is exponential. We think we will be able to tap some markets, combined, between the two networks that neither of us would have been able to do alone.

 

[redflyer65]

Three years to merger the companies and the list.

The arbitor will take that long. Look at the F9/Republic award.
Wait, it's not out yet.

Plus fences beyond that. I imagine the fences will last as long as the 717 leases. Zero extra training cost. Can you say 'synergies'?

 

[Lear70]

Three years to merger the companies and the list.

I'd rather it DIDN'T take that long to realize the cost savings of combined operations, strictly for the financial benefit of the company, but if it does, it does. I'm not going to worry about something I don't have the ability to change, life's too short for that.

This is all a moot point, anyway. In truth, our Merger Committee is COMPLETELY AUTONOMOUS, independent even from the AirTran ALPA leadership. They've been appointed and they act as they see fit in conjunction with attorney input.

Subsequently, arguing with each other on here does absolutely zero good to affect what happens at the table.

 

[ivauir]

This is all a moot point, anyway. In truth, our Merger Committee is COMPLETELY AUTONOMOUS, independent even from the AirTran ALPA leadership. They've been appointed and they act as they see fit in conjunction with attorney input.

Lear,

How can they be autonomous with ALPA leadership at the meetings?

 

[climbhappy]

yep, it's fine and well and good and makes no sense to argue about it, but

telling pilots on here not to argue is like telling your dog not to lick his balls.

 

[Lear70]

Lear,

How can they be autonomous with ALPA leadership at the meetings?

The entire leadership cadre isn't there for all the meetings, just one at this point, and from the way the committee is structured, he can give "thoughts and input", but has no actual say in what the committee decides to do.

It would take an MEC vote to change that power setup and the political fallout over changing it at this point would *NOT* be pretty. You'd likely see new MEC leadership appointed that would make the MC autonomous again. People here feel pretty strongly about not allowing the MEC Leadership to meddle with the MC. We have elections ongoing for two new base LEC's (MKE and MCO) and that's a recurring them for candidates: "How do you feel about the MC and do you support leaving them autonomous?"

yep, it's fine and well and good and makes no sense to argue about it, but

telling pilots on here not to argue is like telling your dog not to lick his balls.

Funny... and true.

:beer: