SWA to have a Q1 loss?

[Abernathy]

Im not a hater (I turned down a job at SW), it is a great airline, but the highest employee costs in the industry will catch up with them. Good luck. I hope I'm wrong.

Airlines would still manage to lose money every quarter even if they paid their pilots with diet cokes from the galley.

The problem isn't the pay. It's the de-regulated system and management teams that are in it for themselves. Southwest was always the exception.

 

[Jon Rivoli]

The problem isn't the pay. It's the de-regulated system and management teams that are in it for themselves. Southwest was always the exception.

Without deregulation, Southwest wouldn't exist.

 

[scoreboardII]

Untrue, deregulation let SWA go outside TX.

 

[becket]

Baffling. Curious if the SWA pilots support taxiing with both running?

Of course they support it! How else can they get up to 85kts on the taxi out?!

 

[Fox-Tree]

Taxiing with both motors is stupid, says this SWA pilot.

That is supposed to change soon. Let's at least hope so.

So, the hold up is....what?
Gotta finish the CBT and do it in the sim first?

 

[StarrBuck]

Anybody know?... have an interview July 19th. Already typed..if all goes well. what type of class date could I expect? I hear not till after the first of the year. Sound about right to you?

Thanks for any and all info!

Ron.. Sorry bud, hope you don't have hard feelings although it looks like that's not the case.. And to answer your question.. I wouldn't be convinced if they wanted a paycut. Thankfully that hasn't happened.. And I'm not saying the bag fee situation is correct.. Only that that is what they believe.. Based on their history.. They usually get it right..

 

[ron burgundy]

Ron.. Sorry bud, hope you don't have hard feelings although it looks like that's not the case.. And to answer your question.. I wouldn't be convinced if they wanted a paycut. Thankfully that hasn't happened.. And I'm not saying the bag fee situation is correct.. Only that that is what they believe.. Based on their history.. They usually get it right..

No Buck..no hard feelings. Didn't work out...nature of the business. Overall,I have been somewhat fortunate. It's just the way it sounded...You were there and telling us what the company believed,like you had no thoughts on the subject and whatever they believe/tell you is gospel. I am sure that is not the case. Thoughts and ideas sometime get lost in text. And ..yes..I would have loved to work at SWA. I am not going through my life bitter because I don't.

 

[Jon Rivoli]

Untrue, deregulation let SWA go outside TX.

So, without deregulation they would have about five airplanes flying between Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. Deregulation gave life to the LCC.

And it was the begining of the end of this profession, it has just taken thirty years to unfold.

 

[N1atEcon]

BR715.
The only sick call abuse is the unethical guys who forget who is signing their paychecks and putting food in their kids mouths. They call in sick only to pick up to up their TFP total. It is disgusting watching these guys do it month after month. There was a guy who finally ran out and actually needed it (for real this time). "I am sorry you have bills to pay, but you have no sick bank" was the CP response. As a whole the pilot group is one of the lowest sick call employee groups of SWA. The FA's and rampers are by far the worst.

 

[canyonblue]

And it was the begining of the end of this profession, it has just taken thirty years to unfold.

NO, it was your RJ that was the beginning and end of this profession. :smash:

 

[Jon Rivoli]

NO, it was your RJ that was the beginning and end of this profession. :smash:

NO, the RJ was a response to the competitive pressure from LCCs, shedding flying that could not be done profitably in the new market place. Legacy's focused on the flying that they can consistently do profitably and outsourced the rest.

Ever read NUTS? Southwest was THE main force driving down fares, they boast of it. Deregulation brought flying to the masses wearing flip flops and and track suits, that is what was intended. If not Southwest, it would have been someone else.

The fact is that there are far more people flying today than ever and there are far more pilots employed today than would be without deregulation. Flying just doesn't pay near what it used to, and never will again. The term "Jet setter" is obsolete.

You didn't destroy this profession any more than I did. It was forces beyond the control of all of us and it was inevitable after deregulation. We both owe our current jobs to the results of deregulation.

Peace

 

[OurMoney1]

Yeah but one thing you guys fail to see is that the other airlines have conditioned the consumer to pay for bags. So Gary always has this card in his back pocket and when he decides to play it SWA will once again be filling up the money bags. Even if he decides first bag flies free he still has millions of ancillary revenue to capture. The LUV machine has options and when the time is right they will execute.

 

[UALjan15]

Plus adding 6 more seats to their existing 700 line.

Really? Ouch!!

I thought SWA had decent, but not really generous seat pitch (I'm tall, so I definitely notice these things). I don't like the idea of adding an extra row. Then again, I'm just a freeloading jumpseater.

 

[On Your Six]

Yeah but one thing you guys fail to see is that the other airlines have conditioned the consumer to pay for bags. So Gary always has this card in his back pocket and when he decides to play it SWA will once again be filling up the money bags. Even if he decides first bag flies free he still has millions of ancillary revenue to capture. The LUV machine has options and when the time is right they will execute.

From the SWA "People's Court" TV Commercials----"No, Southwest would NEVER do that...." Aren't they charging for bags now via Airtran?


Godspeed!


The OYSter

 

[The Prussian]

Baffling. Curious if the SWA pilots support taxiing with both running?

Umm...yes...I do. 90% of the time, our taxi time to the end of the runway is 5 minutes or less. This means during 4-5 minutes of aircraft movement, you're multi-tasking and/or heads down for that other engine start...recipe for trouble with 3500 aircraft movements daily, day in, day out. We do allow for engine shutdown during long delays...both 1 and/or both when appropriate.

 

[PCL_128]

This means during 4-5 minutes of aircraft movement, you're multi-tasking and/or heads down for that other engine start...recipe for trouble with 3500 aircraft movements daily, day in, day out.

We've been doing it safely for years without any problems. It saves tons of money. With no demonstrated reduction in safety, it's crazy not to implement it.

 

[The Prussian]

We've been doing it safely for years without any problems. It saves tons of money. With no demonstrated reduction in safety, it's crazy not to implement it.

OK...tell me...how many "tons of money"?....


and...let's talk SWA systemwide,...not just ATL..

 

[j41driver]

Even if you delay by 2-3 min the savings are large.

2 minutes x 3500 flts/day = 7000 minutes or 116.67 hrs
Whats idle fuel burn? Lets say 700lbs/hr at idle. That's 81669lbs or 12189 gal PER DAY
Over an entire year its almost 4.5million gallons or $15,500,000 savings at $3.50/gal.

Not insignificant and we've been doing it SAFELY on the AT side for years.

 

[j41driver]

It's over $23M annual savings if the delayed start is 3 min per flight. Whether were talking $15M or $23M they're both "tons of money" to me.

 

[The Prussian]

and....taxiing, crossing runways, getting cleared to line up and wait...in idle power, all within 5 minutes, while ascertaining the F/A's have secured the cabin....For those 5 minutes, which is a significant portion of SWA's schedule....things happen...

 

[goahead]

Is single engine taxi really that big of a deal, it's not unsafe and saves a ton of fuel annually. I don't see the problem with it, I don't know of any other similar airline that does double engine everytime. If its gonna be a five minute taxi or less then crack them both up. Do some of that piloting stuff man.

 

[easydoesit]

wussy

 

[ATLplt]

It ain't rocket science, Prussian. We do it all the time, even on short taxi in s**tholes like Flint. Quit making up excuses, and stop wasting our profit sharing checks.

 

[humveedriver]

I agree with the Prussian. It works mostly for SWA because the can turn an aircraft quickly and taxi out in short order at many airports. It also seems to play in well with the way they run their checklist items. AirTran on the 737 side is an oddball. We have a nasty habit of adding late bags. Especially in ATL running two concourses. As a result, we start number 1 first. I think we are just about the only airline that does this. So in addition to fuel savings, there is added safety, so joe ramper doesn't get sucked into the engine. The 717 engine placement meant the for years our rampers never had to worry about a running engine when throwing a bag into the forward cargo bin. It has been the norm at AirTran to start one engine and then immediately crank the other, if there is no line. I agree that it is more work, more repetitive. At high frequency, single runway airports like RSW, it helps. Too bad you can't just write, "Start both engines, unless it makes more sense to just start one" in the manual...

 

[texman]

I see both sides of the story. PCL and Humvee have good points. One thing to think about is SWA is not in ATL all the time like AT. SWA serves markets that are Quick in Quick out. Maybe we should do SE taxi in large airports.

 

[j41driver]

and....taxiing, crossing runways, getting cleared to line up and wait...in idle power, all within 5 minutes, while ascertaining the F/A's have secured the cabin....For those 5 minutes, which is a significant portion of SWA's schedule....things happen...

You could see the same savings by doing sgl engine taxi in. No excuses there.

 

[scoreboardII]

We've been doing it safely for years without any problems. It saves tons of money. With no demonstrated reduction in safety, it's crazy not to implement it.

But I bet your'e not doing it at 30knots...

 

[Cruncher]

Ok, I'm walking into this thread at page 4. So this may have already been said, but we've been beeotching about not having single engine taxi for years (& the subsequent waste of fuel)!

We know it does not distract from safety (like a DAL guy saying a 20 knot taxi is dangerous, yet they are getting ready to take the runway and, wait for it, gonna speed up to rotation speed, while on the ground, not in a simulator - sorry Mr' Beam speaking).

Every swingin' ... (ahhh, guy here) was a captain before, or at least showed a fed how to start a sim, it aint that f'ing hard.

Headwork my man, headwork.

Ah, my new thing is when a Delta plane is about a mile out, I just say "windcheck". I know, I'm a Richard, sometimes. Just trying to help a brother out Heck, I give my buds there tons of sheeot!

 

[Dan Roman]

Ok, I'm walking into this thread at page 4. So this may have already been said, but we've been beeotching about not having single engine taxi for years (& the subsequent waste of fuel)!

We know it does not distract from safety (like a DAL guy saying a 20 knot taxi is dangerous, yet they are getting ready to take the runway and, wait for it, gonna speed up to rotation speed, while on the ground, not in a simulator - sorry Mr' Beam speaking).

Every swingin' ... (ahhh, guy here) was a captain before, or at least showed a fed how to start a sim, it aint that f'ing hard.

Headwork my man, headwork.

Ah, my new thing is when a Delta plane is about a mile out, I just say "windcheck". I know, I'm a Richard, sometimes. Just trying to help a brother out Heck, I give my buds there tons of sheeot!

Forget the rule of twos? No posting for two hours after having two beers or two Starbucks

 

[The Prussian]

You could see the same savings by doing sgl engine taxi in. No excuses there.

We do...no issues there, except core cool down can take up to 3 minutes to avoid engine damage. For us, many times you're arriving at the gate by then. :cartman: