Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AirTran DRC - judgement !

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Apparently, you haven't read the Ruling from the DRC.

After the testimony from both sides, The Arbitrator found:

" . . . The Company further threatened to go to what was described as 'Plan B' if ALPA did not agree to Southwest Airlines 'take it or leave it' offer. Testimony

presented at the hearing indicates that the 'Plan B' that was spoken of was that

AirTran would be operated separately from Southwest Airlines following the

merger and would not be integrated in to Southwest Airlines in the future.

The implementation of this 'Plan B' was that eventually the AirTran side

of the Company would be allowed to 'die' and then the Southwest Airlines side

of the business would absorb those parts of AirTran that it wanted, such as

the valuable DC/La Guardia NYC slots and gates and AirTran's international

destinations such as Mexico and the Caribbean.
Then I guess you failed to read to the end where he says:


"The arbitrator rejects ALPA claim that the SLI was a contract of of adhesion"
"There is no meaningful evidence supporting ALPA claim they had no choice."


and most important:

"ALPA gambled wrong"
 
I posted the part that was germaine to the discussion we were having, which was "Whether or not threats were made to the AAI Pilots".

Clearly, the Arbitrator stated that our jobs were indeed threatened.

Apparently, you now want to change the topic to "Should they have taken SIA #1?" which is, of course, a completely different subject.

You'll have to debate that one with someone else.

Dang it Ty! What the heck do the gall dang Germans have to with anything?
 
Then I guess you failed to read to the end where he says:


"The arbitrator rejects ALPA claim that the SLI was a contract of of adhesion"
"There is no meaningful evidence supporting ALPA claim they had no choice."


and most important:

"ALPA gambled wrong"


Sure we had a choice, just like when you get robbed at gun-point, you have a choice.

What's your point?

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Sure we had a choice, just like when you get robbed at gun-point, you have a choice.

What's your point?

:rolleyes:
The point is, you can SAY they had a gun to your head all you want, but the TRUTH is THE arbitrator disagrees with that clich? by stating "There is no meaningful evidence supporting ALPA claim they had no choice" and "it was hard bargaining" and best "ALPA gambled wrong". Unfortunate that ALPA gambled with pilots livelihoods. Maybe there is some sort of tort in the decision...
 
Last edited:
So what kinda bargaining did the SWA pilots have to deal with?

First you cinderellas are running around like you lost your glass slipper all worried and depressed on the radio. You beg GK to take out the gun and show us with your hire not acquire stickers. Then you have the nerve to say there was no gun to our heads. Sure rub it in now and make it worse. Who are you really making it worse for in the future assho!e?

Unity. What a joke. I am already on board with concessions. You guys suck when Spirit is making more with 1/12th the fleet size.

You pick a great week to revive this.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, guys, but the SWA posters have it right on this one. While it may be true that a gun was held to our heads, the position of the arbitrator was basically that a gun is held to your head in negotiations all the time, and it's up to you to decide whether the party holding the gun is going to pull the trigger or not (or whether it's even loaded). That's just bargaining. "Hard bargaining," to be sure, but most labor negotiations in the airline industry falls under that category. Hardly a negotiation goes by without the company threatening to shut down the airline, furlough employees, fire employees, whatever. It's just part of the game.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top