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 MEC Chair message.

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
We know exactly what we voted on. We consider those "hired" in the pool to be SWA pilots. Those were the ones that I was referring to. DOH, really. So if AT went out and bought (insert regional airline here) you would be clammoring for DOH. I doubt it. DOH is only fair to those who gain because they were at a smaller company.

DOH works in the military because you are working for the same company just different departments. If the USA bought the Mexican army, I doubt DOH would be the "fair" seniority plan.

BTW, SWA is just like every other airline. We do our best to protect what we have and try not to give it away just because someone thinks they deserve it. Adios amigo....

I take exception to your post. Date of hire with fences protects everyone and mitigates the ability of one group to screw another. DOH is how we board pur planes, get pay rates, etc. your post reeks of nothing but arrogance and greed
 
I am neither arrogant nor greedy (at least not more than any other pilot out there). That being said, this is not a "fair" game or a "fair" fight. There is no way to make it fair. Just like the gooberment coming in and messing with every aspect of our society to make it "fair"....it does not work. Why, because your definition and my definition of fair will never match up. Fences only give the appearance of "fair".

The bottom line is we are in a business that is cut throat. There is nothing fair about two corps combining workforces. The two go to battle (negotiations) and some come out winners and others come out on the shorter end of the stick. That is how life is. If you want fair, you joined the wrong business....but all businesses will operate the same way....it is about money and the bottom line!!!

So what is a boy to do? Attach your happiness meter to something besides your job...
 
The problem lies with training not airframe deliveries.
Ok, there are going to be 3 B717s leaving per month starting August 2013. With 11-12 pilots per airplanes, that means approximately 35 AirTran B717 pilots will need to start SWA B737 FO school starting next August.

For 2012, SWA is converting 11 AirTran B737-700s and taking 168 pilots across the partition. The question I have not seen a firm answer to is how many AirTran B737s will be getting converted in 2013 and 2014. If the schoolhouse can handle 72 "initial" training events per month, there would be no problem handling 35 former B717 pilots and 35 former AirTran B737 pilots per month (assuming B737 conversions happen at a rate of 2-3 per month).

Still not sure where you see furloughs coming from. Until SWA management comes out and announces a 10% reduction in ASMs (and the associated 10% drop in system block hours), I just don't see any furloughs happening. With the current fuel prices/revenue environment, I don't see SWA needing to reduce capacity anytime soon to maintain profitability. Gary Kelly bought AirTran to solidfy their domestic position and grow, not shrink.
 
He did not do it to grow unless he hits his 15% ROI. Which he won't.

Exactly. People counting on growth are living in a fantasy world.

Not that I think furloughs are coming. That's just as unlikely as growth, in my opinion.
 
This is where I think the AT folks will realize that they will never get laid off. Here is a number for every AT pilot to take note of. If the price of fuel hits 148 a barrel then we will all have problems. So it needs to jump 60 plus dollars to do so. So of I was AT I wouldn't worry. The numbers will work out for the aircraft transition.
 
Just as I made your argument , you made mine.

Your are right, we AT pilots are not equal to the all knowing great SWA pilots. I bow to your superiority will graciously accept my new position in the right seat. And I further apologize for ever thinking that I could ever be an equal after 12 years reduced to 8.5.

As people we're equal, pilots are pilots - some are better than others on both sides- ive met some really great ones on the AT side. But as jobs- these were not equal jobs and Swa was harder to get. Those of us who were able to get the job took longer to get it. That's why the 2-3 years- IMO should've been 5. But I'm living with the outcome.
 
GK bought AT to remove 1/3rd of the airlines competing against him with lower costs. He did not do it to grow unless he hits his 15% ROI. Which he won't.
For the 12 month period ending 3/31/12, SWA pulled a 6.1% ROIC with an economic fuel cost of $3.30/gallon. Doing the reverse math provided by the data in the Q1 2012 earnings release, here are the fuel prices that would have been necessary to pull 10% and 15% ROIC:

$3.03/gallon => 10% ROIC

$2.57/gallon => 15% ROIC

The latest SWA RASM estimates were for May 2012 and they came in 5-6% higher than May 2011. The latest EIA spot prices for Jet A are in the $2.60-2.70 range. With the current revenue initiatives coming online over the next few years (Rapid Rewards, AirTran acquisition synergies, B737-800 deployment, and international flying) and the current trends in energy costs, SWA could attain a 15% ROIC quicker than you think. The question is how many consecutive months of lower energy costs will it take for Gary to feel comfortable pulling the growth lever. I seriously doubt SWA is only producing 120 billion ASMs annually by the year 2015.
 
As people we're equal, pilots are pilots - some are better than others on both sides- ive met some really great ones on the AT side. But as jobs- these were not equal jobs and Swa was harder to get. Those of us who were able to get the job took longer to get it. That's why the 2-3 years- IMO should've been 5. But I'm living with the outcome.

And for those of us that never aspired to work at WN don't really care how hard it was to get a job, how long it took, or what it cost (buy your own type, get one from the govt/military, or from a previous employer) and don't believe it should have been a factor at all. But I'm living with the outcome.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top