• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

Airtan Pilots

Fly-diver

That's one humble bumble!
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Posts
39
Total Time
3500
You've got serious trust issues

If you can find me anywhere in SL9 that even GUARANTEES there will BE an ATL SWA pilot base anytime prior to the completion of Operational Integration, I'll buy you a case of Scotch.

I realize you've been kicked around by management for several years over there, but you've got to get over your trust issues. If GK says he intends to open an ATL SWA pilot base that is what he means. You won't be getting any guarantees... would you have trusted your previous mgt if they made you a "guarantee?"

Life is about to get dramatically better for you... try to relax.

From SL9:
2. As part of this agreement Southwest Airlines commits to establishing an Atlanta domicile with a minimum of ten (10) overnighting 737 and fifteen (15) overnighting 717 aircraft to be completed by the later of complete operational integration or October 1, 2014, unless otherwise mutually agreed by both parties.
 

Fubijaakr

Seniority is Forever
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Posts
2,537
Total Time
Enough
Again, will someone please answer the question...Why does it matter to YOU what another SWA pilot gets paid? Does it reduce YOUR wages?

Or is it just an excuse for the SWA seniority grab?
 

'LUVIN LIFE

No Matter the Situation
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Posts
45
Total Time
>1.0
Old Crow,

You and I have similar priorities. My family and I are also very involved in our schools and church so QOL is a HUGE deal for me. Here's one thing you can look at. How many trips will you need to fly at SWA to equal your 90 trips at AAI? That was the number which you said gave you the $$ you needed, right? My guess is somewhere around low 70's? Our line guarantees rarely ever pay less than 90, so you could have a 3 on 4 off schedule, give away one of those 3-days, and still be around 70 SWA hours of pay. Every day is a minimum 6.50 of of pay on a trip. So is it worth commuting to only work 9-10 days a month? That's pretty good QOL!

We have many pilots who have commuted for decades. Why? Well they love those stupid outlying Texas cities for some reason. They go to BWI and MDW and beyond. Now who would commute for that long unless it wasn't that bad/hard?

Unfortunately the truth is once you figure out the system there is NO WAY you will settle for 70 trips for pay, the money is just too easy to make by working the system! :p

Once again vote for you and your family, it is a personal choice. You all will figure out though that scheduling flexibility and pay here makes everything a total game changer.

Ask any other questions and I'll be happy to answer.
 

madjack

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Posts
1,240
Total Time
7500
I here the tranny's concern about seniority and QOL but how would your seniority and QOL be if you were out of a job? At SWA you will have better job security...you will have jealous losers like Gen Lee and OYS giving you sh&* on this forum...you will be on the inside...take this thing to arby and we all are in for a ride...you will not get more out of SWAPA/MR Kelly...this is the best deal you will get...I wasn't there but something convinced your MC to take the deal...and isn't the MC FO dominated??
 

greenpilot

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Posts
56
Total Time
7500
Old crow. There is a chance you will still be able to hold that atl base. Most of our pilots commute. I there will be pilots senior to you that will leave atl to be closer to home.
You will also have the chance to drop drips and then pick up atl based trips.
 

Lear70

JAFFO
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Posts
7,487
Total Time
4abeer
I realize you've been kicked around by management for several years over there, but you've got to get over your trust issues. If GK says he intends to open an ATL SWA pilot base that is what he means. You won't be getting any guarantees... would you have trusted your previous mgt if they made you a "guarantee?"

Life is about to get dramatically better for you... try to relax.
I have yet to work for a company that actually honors the INTENT of the contract if the language isn't absolutely SOLID behind it (and our MEC has similar backgrounds), so yeah, I'm a little gunshy, as are 1,741 of my brethren.

That said, the issue is that Side Letter 9 has 4 major problems (and a bunch of little ones), one of which is that there is no resolution process that has an impartial 3rd party to settle disputes in the SL9 language. So what happens if we disagree down the road with SWAPA on implementation of SL9?

So I guess the question is, will the 4-party agreement clear up the 4 "MAJOR" issues in SL9 that don't agree with the bulletpoint AIP our Merger Committee put out in the terms of "protections", along with hopefully clearing up the dozens of minor issues, enough to, as you said, "relax".

Since you posted one of the big issues that were touted to us as "protection", let's work it so you can understand the issue:

From SL9: 2. As part of this agreement Southwest Airlines commits to establishing an Atlanta domicile with a minimum of ten (10) overnighting 737 and fifteen (15) overnighting 717 aircraft to be completed by the later of complete operational integration or October 1, 2014, unless otherwise mutually agreed by both parties.

Let's work it backwards.

Point 1: "unless otherwise mutually agreed by both parties."

It's a base for US, yet we will have no say so if the timeline to create those bases is extended indefinitely. "Both parties" allows SWA and SWAPA to decide when, if ever, to create an ATL 717 or 737 domicile.

Point 2: "10 overnighting 737 aircraft and 15 overnighting 717 aircraft". OK, that's overnighting aircraft. Who says there has to be 850 pilots? Who says there can't be that many overnighting aircraft and only HALF the crews to go with it? Coming from Nashville, where there are anywhere from 5-7 overnighting aircraft seasonally (it changes pretty regularly), and there's NO crew base, I'm aware that just because there's overnighting planes doesn't mean that there has to be enough based crews for each and every one of them.

That's the biggest point of this particular issue. We were all banking on the idea of letting the junior people go ahead of us into training while we enjoy the last of our bidding power for the holidays another year or two, then go into training afterwards and slide right into ATL, letting the senior among us hold onto decent schedules for a year or two of the next DECADE it will take us to get back where we are now. That's how our bulletpoints our Merger Committee sent to us read.

However, the reality from this part of SL9 basically doesn't say there will even BE an ATL domicile anytime in the near future. And why should there be? If there's already too many airplanes based there for SWA's model and they only plan to move aircraft to different bases after they are converted to SWA colors, there will be more ATL-based planes than they want for years (it will take a while to pull down to only 10 overnighting 737's). So why open a SWA ATL domicile until they get down to the last 10 ATL 737's and only THEN open it?

Lastly, here is a quote from Paragraph F.1 and F.2 of SL9:

"F. Base Protections
1. AirTran Pilots will be assigned to Atlanta for their initial vacancy bid at Southwest provided Atlanta vacancies are available.
2. If no Atlanta vacancies are available, newly transitioned AirTran Pilots will be awarded."

In other words, we don't get the protections of ATL if, when we come out of training, there IS no ATL base. That could be 2-3 YEARS into the 9-year "fence", or longer if SWAPA and SWA agree - we get no say in it.

What good is a fence if it fences a base that doesn't exist?

Another option: SWA opens ATL on the SWA side as a 737 base on Jan 1, 2012 and they fully staff the base. The first of our pilots hasn't gone to training when that vacancy becomes effective. So the base is fully-staffed with SWA pilots when our pilots come out of training, so they'll go to the bottom if they bid ATL in all likelihood. How many of our pilots will do that and just "suck it up" until more and more AAI pilots use the displacement rights and push out SWA pilots, knowing they'll be junior on reserve for half a year or more -vs- being a junior line holder in MDW or BWI? I'd bet not that many.

So it's not that we don't trust SWA to open that base, we just recognize that the deal we were sold (an ATL base that's fenced from the very outset) doesn't match the language in SL9 - could happen years from now and we go a long while without realizing the protections of the fence or it could happen before we even go to training and it becomes problematic to bid into it.

This is what we're waiting to see (among several other issues) whether it gets fixed in the 4-party agreement to match the AIP we were given.
 
Last edited:

GuppyWN

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Posts
3,204
Total Time
14000
Another option: SWA opens ATL on the SWA side as a 737 base on Jan 1, 2012 and they fully staff the base. The first of our pilots hasn't gone to training when that vacancy becomes effective. So the base is fully-staffed with SWA pilots when our pilots come out of training, so they'll go to the bottom if they bid ATL in all likelihood. How many of our pilots will do that and just "suck it up" until more and more AAI pilots use the displacement rights and push out SWA pilots, knowing they'll be junior on reserve for half a year or more -vs- being a junior line holder in MDW or BWI? I'd bet not that many.

Don't you guys get super-seniority in ATL?

Gup
 
Last edited:

shootr

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
486
Total Time
10+
Lear's points seem fair, to me. If this is what ALPA is doing, I have no problem with it (other than the timing). Hopefully, that's what's happening and the "4 parties" will resolve these issues, quickly. If not...

BTW, I'm still undecided and the language of the MOU/4 party agreement may have an effect on my vote.
 

madjack

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Posts
1,240
Total Time
7500
Hey Lear,

If you wanted to stay in one place your whole life you should have become a shoe salesman...your in the airline industry, you were bought, you are going to get a raise in the biggest recession since the big one...yet you are nitpicking this thing...Mr Kelly has an airline to run, he showed his hand with ATL (did not have to...)...who the hell knows what's going to happen in the next 10 years, don't tie the company's hand...they are not out to screw you, just make money...GK had to throw a bone to the SWA pilots, we got seniority, you get everything else and yes you may have to move...deal with it, your an airline pilot, we all have had to uproot, it's part of the career...
 

Ty Webb

Hostage to Fortune
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Posts
6,525
Total Time
11000+
Oh, Lord. . . . . not the "back at Eastern speech," please . . . :rolleyes:
 

greenpilot

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Posts
56
Total Time
7500
Gup,
My guess is no matter what happens atl will always be a base. I do believe if this goes to arbitration there will be a lot less then 850 AirTran pilots able to hold atl. Lear doesn't live in atl so I don't know why he cares
 

Lear70

JAFFO
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Posts
7,487
Total Time
4abeer
Don't you guys get super-seniority in ATL?

Gup
No. There's absolutely no provision in SL9 or in the AIP that we've been given bulletpoints of (and that would have been seen as a MAJOR part of any agreement) that allows for a "base within a base within a base", whereby we'd have an un-transitioned AAI side, a regular SWA base, and another group of "super-senior" AAI pilots who are always senior to other SWA pilots in ATL.

Once a SWA pilot gets into ATL, they bid against our other 737 pilots just like they would at any other base. A SWA pilot can only be displaced if a more senior SWA pilot is displaced and wants ATL or if a previous-AirTran pilot is displaced and wants to come back to ATL (27.F.3.F).

And I don't think you're picking on me, it's just a healthy debate so we understand each other's point of view. No animosity, you guys didn't craft this, I'm not taking it personally, just wanting it to work the way it was advertised.

As for your other question, I'm not entirely certain, but I know that they want at least 5/7 737's/717's in ATL, so I don't see the base closing, although it could certainly be smaller with a lower fence. That's a risk of arbitration, but then we'd have better seniority in most cases, so a lot of us would bid to other SWA bases (I'd be mid-level in MCO with Date of Hire and would gladly take that over bottom 23% in ATL). If, if, if... we know how THAT goes. :)

Lear's points seem fair, to me. If this is what ALPA is doing, I have no problem with it (other than the timing). Hopefully, that's what's happening and the "4 parties" will resolve these issues, quickly. If not...

BTW, I'm still undecided and the language of the MOU/4 party agreement may have an effect on my vote.
Fair enough. I know it's not a "given" on your side of the fence, either.

As far as "what ALPA is doing", there's several sides and facets of what's going on behind the scenes right now. The MC is trying to fix these issues in Dallas, which is what is taking so long. They also recognize that there are those who are hoping they CAN'T deliver on the AIP bulletpoint promises, because they know that would kill it at the MEC level, so the stakes of getting those protections right are high. If they can, the MEC will be cornered and probably have to send it to vote.

Hey Lear,

If you wanted to stay in one place your whole life you should have become a shoe salesman...your in the airline industry, you were bought, you are going to get a raise in the biggest recession since the big one...yet you are nitpicking this thing...
It's not just me, there's lots of people seeing the possibilities of the AIP bulletpoints to be bypassed in the actual SL9 language (including our attorney). I'm just communicating what's going on (from what little I know) so you guys understand what our people are worried about.

Mr Kelly has an airline to run, he showed his hand with ATL (did not have to...)...who the hell knows what's going to happen in the next 10 years, don't tie the company's hand...they are not out to screw you, just make money...GK had to throw a bone to the SWA pilots, we got seniority, you get everything else and yes you may have to move...deal with it, your an airline pilot, we all have had to uproot, it's part of the career...
I'm not moving. That much is certain (joint custody issues, I spend all my off time with my son). But I don't live in ATL, either. I was just looking forward to having SOME seniority to exert to make ELITT and TTGA easier with better trips to offer by going back to ATL until SWA has some attrition in 4-5 years and I can hold that same seniority in other bases (bidding in the bottom 10% in a combined list but would be 25% in ATL). A lot of other pilots were planning the same thing, so it's a major issue.

It's like anything else. If you get sold one thing then delivered something else entirely, it's aggravating. The same thing happened to you guys to a certain extent, your Comm people sold you one bill of goods and this falls short of it. In my opinion, they mis-managed your expectations, hence the level of angst over there right now. We're just trying to make sure the same thing doesn't happen here TWICE. It happened once with the AIP - came out MUCH lower than our expectations were set. Now they're set again with the AIP, and I don't think they'll take a 2nd hit - it'll die at the MEC level if it happens.
 
Last edited:

madjack

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Posts
1,240
Total Time
7500
it'll die at the MEC level if it happens.

If that happens, SWA will be just the latest airline in that long distinguished of lists of airlines that have been screwed by ALPA...go ahead F(*& it away, arby would be better for me in terms of time to upgrade (shorter fence, less seat protection for your CPs), but I would rather come to work at a place where the pilot group got along, and a negotiated settlement is the best hope for that...
 

Lear70

JAFFO
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Posts
7,487
Total Time
4abeer
it'll die at the MEC level if it happens.

If that happens, SWA will be just the latest airline in that long distinguished of lists of airlines that have been screwed by ALPA...go ahead F(*& it away, arby would be better for me in terms of time to upgrade (shorter fence, less seat protection for your CPs), but I would rather come to work at a place where the pilot group got along, and a negotiated settlement is the best hope for that...
That's all very true, and I don't blame you for feeling that way. It's one of the only reasons I'm CONSIDERING taking TWICE the hit I'm told I'd probably take in arbitration.

NONE of the protections except the guarantee of employment and the ATL base affect me personally, but my reasons for being open to this solution are:

1. I want to work at Southwest.
2. I don't want to screw my fellow 717 pilots and Captains by voting no so I can personally gain at their possible expense (loss of protections).
3. I want the combined group to not be at each other's throats for years to come.

Everyone is going to be irritated, some on our side probably more than yours with this deal and stagnating growth, but better to have a negotiated solution than one forced on everyone, especially now that we have this solution. If we kill it and get something better in Arby, your guys would hate us for years.

Matching it to the AIP is totally up to SWAPA and SWA at this point.
 

GuppyWN

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Posts
3,204
Total Time
14000
Lear,

Let me rephrase. Airtran pilots get EVERY Atlanta bid until 2020. I don't think it's a matter of making it a WN base or not. Ya'll get first dibs - period.

I thought.
 

Lear70

JAFFO
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Posts
7,487
Total Time
4abeer
That's what we were told, too, except there's a loophole in SL9 that could be exploited to open it BEFORE our crews start transitioning, thus staffing it with SWA pilots. It's not entirely clear how the displacements would work in that case with Par 11 of SL9.

Just questions that we're trying to get answered in the 4-party agreement. It may totally work that way in the end, just standing by for answers...
 

madjack

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Posts
1,240
Total Time
7500
I heard from one of our union guys that AIRTRAN ALPA was "closing the loopholes"...but the end effect would not substantively change the intent of the agreement...
 

Lear70

JAFFO
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Posts
7,487
Total Time
4abeer
I heard from one of our union guys that AIRTRAN ALPA was "closing the loopholes"...but the end effect would not substantively change the intent of the agreement...
That's what I mean. The bulletpoints of the AIP came out and we're just looking to make sure that the intent of the AIP is held up in the language.

It's all good, just have to let them work it out. :)
 

whalepilot747

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Posts
28
Total Time
10K+
Lear,

From what I reading and understanding in your posts. ALPA is looking out for ALPA at the national level so they do not get sued again and lose. ALPA's interest is ALPA. They know AT pilots are leaving for SWAPA. Dude, I too was a paranoid ALPA guy for many years and I still have the nervous tic every once in a while. :) What ALPA doesnt understand and never will is that there does not have an adverserial (sp?) relationship all the time. The company is not always out to screw it's pilots. Granted, two sides may not always agree but it can be worked out without the normal ALPA bs.

My understanding is that trannies are protected in ATL, plain and simple. Gup's said it as well. I hope you realize the difference when you get here and your "nervous tic" will subside as well like mine has over the years. Whatever you decide or all the trannies that's up to you............

Life is perfect here but a helluva lot better than any place I have ever worked and I am definitely not a Kool-aid drinker.....
 

Luv2BFlyin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Posts
514
It would be wonderful to just "trust" your mgmt. However, your mgmt has employed KG and GA. Forgive me, but those two can't be trusted further than you could throw them. There is at least one other issue about your mgmt that has given our mec pause as well. Unfortunately, these two issues have not created a trustworthy environment. I'm well aware we don't work for GK yet, however, he's missed some no cost opportunities to grease the skids in the trust department. So far, we're seeing SSDD.
 
Top