A Southwest pilot perspective

[pilotyip]

Bro you're bitter and full of hate.

Just so you know we have guys hired early in 2001 that upgraded in just over 6 years while guys hired in the fall of 2001 have yet to upgrade. I blame Age 65 as much as a slow economy.

Gup

He is a liberal, they hate everything, they are victims, and love to give away other people's money.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Ham,

Don't you know any opinion that runs counter to Canyon Blue groupthink qualifies as hate speech?

 

[redflyer65]

Why are you even on these threads? Unbelievable.

 

[Fubijaakr]

To illustrate the patent unfairness that your arrogance deems "fair and equitable." In fact there are several of us who point that out on a daily basis.

But its just like the SWA "culture" to attempt to silence the naysayers.

Guess what? The Emperor has no clothes.

 

[scoreboardII]

I might think different. Of course, not being retarded, I understand that your statement is either the work of someone who has no concept whatsoever of fact, or is so woefully committed fabrication, that they don't understand how easy it is to look up fact.

Your '20 year upgrade' may be compelling if it had any basis in reality.

It doesn't.

APC says, as of today, (post merger, post age 65) that the most junior Captain was hired in 2001. How does this reality translate to your "what if" fantasy of 20 year upgrades?

Try to base your position on reality. Adding an extra 10 years to reality. (doubling it!) to make your point is evidence of failure on your part.
If your position had actual merit, you wouldn't need to horribly exaggerate facts to support it.

Ewww, I sense anger. OK, I''ll play along for another turn or two, but only if it keeps getting under your skin as it appears you are the one who rides the short bus to work.

I guess you don't know we currently have 11 year FO's? And not by choice as in AT's batch of perma-FO's, which there is nothing wrong with, we will have them as well.

So, hows that 10 year upgrade argument now?

I wager we see 15 year FO's long before we see 8 year FO's upgrading again, wanna wager on that?

You really need to be somewhat proficient using a thing called "math" and extrapolate by applying a simple formula to determine what happens in the future, not whats happening today.

If we currently have 10-11 year FO's, with zero growth and only retirements to grease the skids of upgrade, how many years will it take to upgrade? I'll help, the first upgrade won't happen for another 458 days so those 11 year guys will be 12-13 year FO's.

A 7 year FO will upgrade when? 458 days plus number needed to retire equals 9 more years, they will be 16 year FO's. How many years will a 4 year FO need to upgrade? 14 years, an 18 year FO.

Now, how many years will it take a new hire in 2011 to upgrade? 19 years plus or minus.

So how about you come back to the reality of math and open your eyes.

I also wager upgrades will reduce to 10-15 years, but not before the 20 year FO's become a reality.

.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Then I suggest if someone doesn't want a 19 year upgrade they apply somewhere else. Virgin is upgrading quickly.

LOL!

 

[scoreboardII]

Then I suggest if someone doesn't want a 19 year upgrade they apply somewhere else. Virgin is upgrading quickly.

LOL!

we have a resume pile 7000 applications high, no worries here.

 

[redflyer65]

To illustrate the patent unfairness

I think we are all big boys and girls here and don't need your 'illustrations', so why don't you give it a rest already.

You are completely irrelivant, just like Gen and OYS. What a great group you've joined...

 

[Fubijaakr]

I think we are all big boys and girls here.

I disagree. You all act like a bunch of whiny, spoiled brats who are outraged that someone might get a cookie before you do.

Until you all grow up, you'll need adults to point out the fallacy of your Canyon Blue groupthink.

Y'all are just mad because someone keeps showing you up.

(Like that "y'all"? I threw in some SWA "culture" to help you keep up.)

 

[Ty Webb]

Until you all grow up, you'll need adults to point out the fallacy of your Canyon Blue groupthink.

I think it is actually spelled "phallusy".

 

[On Your Six]

I disagree. You all act like a bunch of whiny, spoiled brats who are outraged that someone might get a cookie before you do.

Until you all grow up, you'll need adults to point out the fallacy of your Canyon Blue groupthink.

Y'all are just mad because someone keeps showing you up.

(Like that "y'all"? I threw in some SWA "culture" to help you keep up.)

Well stated, and I don't mind contributing everyday if I have to. It's tough to break these Corndogs, but it will happen, and then the World will be a better place. I stll have my popcorn ready, though.


Godspeed to everyone!


OYS

 

[StrapHangar]

SWA Bubba

Also my first post...

Try to make your case with SWA acquiring Alaska Airlines.

Also an ALPA carrier. They have around 1500 or so pilots I think.

Make your argument with a more reasonable comparison.
Alaska is just a tad bit smaller than Airtran, but VERY comparable
in size regards to pilot group and any merged SLI.

My attempt to reduce the anxiety you portrayed comparing Airtran
and Great Lakes...along with reducing the hatred and disparity that
seems to be developing between two pilot groups.

Thanks

 

[scoreboardII]

Y'all are just mad because someone keeps showing you up.

.)

I'm saving this one for rebutal once the facts are in.

 

[luvfan]

Questions

Pilots hired in 2002:

By airTran, what were their qualifications?
By SWA, what were their qualifications?

How about 2004, how about 2007?

So now as we get ready to merge these pilots onto one list, the pilots hired by AirTran in 2004 (as an example), who are Captains at their airline get merged onto the Southwest list. Where should they be integrated? What were their career expectations; what is fair? Did they have the experience and qualifications to get hired by SWA in 2004?

In 2004 was it more desirable to get hired by SWA or AirTran?

If you got hired by SWA in 2004 is it fair that someone who got hired by AirTran gets placed ahead of you seniority-wise?

This isn't trying to say any one pilot is better than another or that one group of pilots is better than another. A lot of pilots who were hired at SWA were "lucky" as much as anything. But once they were on the list they had expectations because they were on the list. And anyone in their right mind would acknowledge that from a career-expectations standpoint SWA was a better place to go in 2004. So why hurt the folks who made it past the interview/hiring hurdle and help those who did not? That makes no sense.

Southwest pilots through SWAPA and the generosity of SWA negotiated SWAPA wages and benefits. Those benefits from a monetary standpoint (career expectations) far exceed those of airTran pilots. This isn't dissing anyone but making an objective comparison. This is part of ascertaining what is and would be fair. Salary/compensation, 401k, profit-sharing. No comparison.

If you were hired by Delta in 1989 you would be pissed if someone who got hired by AmericanEagle in 1989 was put in front of you in an acquisition.

Pilots know the more desirable career destination when they apply...

Should I go to FedEX or ABX?
Would I rather get hired by UPS or Polar? DUH!

How many AirTran pilots had applications at SWA?
How many SWA pilots had applications at AirTran?

How many former aIrTran pilots made the move to SWA (after they built the numbers to qualify)
How many former SWA pilots at airTran?

These are rhetorical questions. The career expectations of SWA pilots were much greater than what they were at AirTran (prior to the acquisition). Gary's first offer was a gigantic windfall for all the tranny pilots. The MEC snubbed SWA.

AirTran pilots didn't "earn" seniority at SWA. This is because they would not have qualified to be at SWA on the day they were hired at airTran. If they had, they would have rationally chosen to go to SWA not airTran.

 

[On Your Six]

Pilots hired in 2002:

By airTran, what were their qualifications?
By SWA, what were their qualifications?

How about 2004, how about 2007?

So now as we get ready to merge these pilots onto one list, the pilots hired by AirTran in 2004 (as an example), who are Captains at their airline get merged onto the Southwest list. Where should they be integrated? What were their career expectations; what is fair? Did they have the experience and qualifications to get hired by SWA in 2004?

In 2004 was it more desirable to get hired by SWA or AirTran

If you got hired by SWA in 2004 is it fair that someone who got hired by AirTran gets placed ahead of you seniority-wise?

This isn't trying to say any one pilot is better than another or that one group of pilots is better than another. A lot of pilots who were hired at SWA were "lucky" as much as anything. But once they were on the list they had expectations because they were on the list. And anyone in their right mind would acknowledge that from a career-expectations standpoint SWA was a better place to go in 2004. So why hurt the folks who made it past the interview/hiring hurdle and help those who did not? That makes no sense.

Southwest pilots through SWAPA and the generosity of SWA negotiated SWAPA wages and benefits. Those benefits from a monetary standpoint (career

expectations) far exceed those of airTran pilots. This isn't dissing anyone but making an objective comparison. This is part of ascertaining what is and would be fair. Salary/compensation, 401k, profit-sharing. No comparison.

If you were hired by Delta in 1989 you would be pissed if someone who got hired by AmericanEagle in 1989 was put in front of you in an acquisition.

Pilots know the more desirable career destination when they apply...

Should I go to FedEX or ABX?
Would I rather get hired by UPS or Polar? DUH!

How many AirTran pilots had applications at SWA?
How many SWA pilots had applications at AirTran?

How many former aIrTran pilots made the move to SWA (after they built the numbers to qualify)
How many former SWA pilots at airTran?

These are rhetorical questions. The career expectations of SWA pilots were much greater than what they were at AirTran (prior to the acquisition). Gary's

first offer was a gigantic windfall for all the tranny pilots. The MEC snubbed SWA.

AirTran pilots didn't "earn" seniority at SWA. This is because they would not have qualified to be at SWA on the day they were hired at airTran. If they had, they would have rationally chosen to go to SWA not airTran.

Almost all of what you state is subjective. You ask about career expectations, yet you both fly the same type planes. You compare pay scales, which over a career can change on a dime (look at Delta and their highest rates before BK). You compare hiring standards or applications, which again is up to the individual. What if the pilot wanted to fly out of a base near his home in Georgia? Does that make him a worse or less desirable pilot because he chose seniority over pay at Airtran? You think so. The arbitrators won't care. They will look at what each airline brings to the combined airline NOW. They will look at certain criteria, like longevity with each company, etc, but since SWA even offered same pay initially for the 717, an arbitrator may equate the 717 with the 737 because apparently SWA already did. If you end up in arbitration, you may be shocked at the eventual outcome.


Godspeed!


OYS

 

[mroadster]

Heard the new sli proposal is out via twitter. Any details on this? What's "PLAN B"?

 

[redflyer65]

Not sure what's in the proposal yet, if someone has details please post them.

Plan 'b' is to run the companies seperately.

 

[Ty Webb]

Pilots hired in 2002:

AirTran pilots didn't "earn" seniority at SWA. This is because they would not have qualified to be at SWA on the day they were hired at airTran. If they had, they would have rationally chosen to go to SWA not airTran.

This is incorrect, and just more thinly-disguised self justification. AirTran's requirements have been very similar to SWA's since 2002.

Sure, you can say SWA minimums required 1,000 turbine PIC, and AirTran minimums required 500 FAR Part 121 turbine PIC, but the truth is that both carriers were able to choose from thousands of applicants and it was a very lucky individual hired with the bare "minimums".

More importantly, why do you keep posting this type of self-deluding nonsense? Does it make you feel better when you look in the mirror?

Clearly, you're writing it for yourself and a few of your fellow travelers, because most of the AirTran guys don't bother coming here anymore, or if we do, we just look, laugh and leave? There is nothing to see here but posturing, rants, and a few truly bizarre individuals.

 

[texman]

Ty your pretty wired yourself. Your going to fit right in. LOL!

 

[mroadster]

So "PLAN B" is basically sign this or you're fired??? Seems more like Mafia negotiations. Forgetta bout it!