Airtran MEC voted no

[bravodude]

Along with Gary Kelly.

Want the quickest way to 1,742 disgruntled pilots? Take them back to year 1 longevity (or ANY reduction in longevity for that matter) or reduce or wipe out their vacation and sick bank. What do you think pilots will do when they find out their sick bank will get wiped out? Be honest with yourself, what would YOU do?

Not to mention the DFR suits that would get filed for retaliatory and discriminatory practice.

There's a reaction for every action. Just a thought...

With all due respect if you had a choice would you pis off 1700 pilots or 6000 pilots. Ask yourself what happens when an arbitrator hands down a ruling that is less advantageous then the one we just had SL 9. what would 6000 pilots do. what will the ceo of a company that has 6000 pilots do. would he really integrate 1700 happy pilots into 6000 pis pilots and pis them off even more. Be honest with yourself what would you do.

 

[Ty Webb]

With all due respect if you had a choice would you pis off 1700 pilots or 6000 pilots. Ask yourself what happens when an arbitrator hands down a ruling that is less advantageous then the one we just had SL 9. what would 6000 pilots do.

You don't get to pick and choose whether to honor it; either you agree to let an arbitrator settle it, or you don't. That's the whole point of arbitration.

If you want to pick and choose what neutral advice to follow, that process is called "mediation", and the opportunity to do that is between now and September 30th.

 

[Lear70]

Economy is going in the tank, AT is way too inefficient in many markets, look for the cut backs to begin and guess which side of the fence they will occur.

Unlikely. AirTran flourishes in an economic downturn. Always has, and we're hedged better than Southwest is.

Add to that the fact that we've already started cutting those inefficient markets (announcements last month) and have been re-deploying the aircraft on higher-yield markets, making us even more profitable than we've already been in the past...

We're going to be just fine during the interim while we're working on this, as is Southwest and your pilot group. No reason to be hating, this is just part of the process, like it or not. I'm still betting on an 11th hour negotiated settlement, one that addresses GhettoJet's issue and that I proposed before. I'm trying to flesh it out and present it to the MC, in hopes it offers an alternative that wouldn't harm a single SWA pilots' upgrade, relative seniority, and still protects AAI pilots' Quality of Life moving forward.

Believe it or not, most of us DO value the SWA culture and believe there's ways to craft an SLI that don't harm ANYONE at SWA and don't harm AAI pilots unduly. I'm staying positive, hope everyone else can as well... Fly safe out there! :beer: (emoticon back by popular demand)

 

[Jake Dawg]

From the outside.....

1. Trannie MEC followed typical the alpo playbook and didn't give THEIR pilots a say. Ever wonder why more and more pilot groups are looking at independence from alpo? The AT MEC gave SWA/GK the bird. If the sentiment of the AT pilots is as strong as the MEC vote suggests, send it to the pilots and let the pilots give SWA/GK another bird. Much stronger position to be in.

2. If I was SW and SWAPA, I'd be pissed for one reason. The trannie MEC wasted a lot of time and money by having a MC that agreed to a deal that wasn't even close to passing. Why would the trannie MEC send a MC into negotiations without clear guidance? Only one answer, trannie and alpo dysfunction.

 

[trip]

With all due respect if you had a choice would you pis off 1700 pilots or 6000 pilots. Ask yourself what happens when an arbitrator hands down a ruling that is less advantageous then the one we just had SL 9. what would 6000 pilots do. what will the ceo of a company that has 6000 pilots do. would he really integrate 1700 happy pilots into 6000 pis pilots and pis them off even more. Be honest with yourself what would you do.

He should have thought of that before he went shopping.

 

[canyonblue]

The MEC voted it down because the majority of our pilots didn't feel that a 32% seniority haircut was "fair and equitable".

I wish you guys would stop using the "32%" lie. If every AAI pilot is losing 32%, then every SWA pilot is gaining 32%. Show me where every SWA pilot gains 32% and I will never bring it up again. Using your example our SWA senior F/O's would fall at about 30% relative on your list by DOH. This AIP would put them at around 44% relative on the new list, so your point may be that why should a SWA pilot lose 14% when we are the stronger acquiring carrier? Somebody please set Doc Brown's DeLorean to 9/20/2010, I'm sure Biff is running AirTran ALPA.

 

[JT12345]

2. If I was SW and SWAPA, I'd be pissed for one reason. The trannie MEC wasted a lot of time and money by having a MC that agreed to a deal that wasn't even close to passing. Why would the trannie MEC send a MC into negotiations without clear guidance? Only one answer, trannie and alpo dysfunction.

Sorry about that, sincerely if it is true.

I think SWAPA is really good at what they do. I respect them, and am just looking for some respect from this agreement. Not just money.

 

[JT12345]

With all due respect if you had a choice would you pis off 1700 pilots or 6000 pilots. Ask yourself what happens when an arbitrator hands down a ruling that is less advantageous then the one we just had SL 9. what would 6000 pilots do. what will the ceo of a company that has 6000 pilots do. would he really integrate 1700 happy pilots into 6000 pis pilots and pis them off even more. Be honest with yourself what would you do.

The anguish over here because we are the minority is obvious. I interviewed at SWA and this merger process is a lot worse than that was.

We just don't think we have even come close to upsetting you guys. That is why we pushed back. That agreement was really unfair, not because of other airlines and your past mergers, but because of *** who we are.***

When it is all said and done whether we get relative or date of hire or something with protections, a SWAs pilots life is not going to change much. No risk. Just the disappointment of future expectations.

There is no risk of you guys losing your jobs. So don't tell me you are as disappointed with this agreement as we are. What we have on the line here man, and to vote it down!!!!!! It was so unfair and disrepectful.

 

[Flycatcher99]

Ask how it worked out for SWA captains who left for United in '99.

This would be a good point, if we were talking about AT pilots leaving AT for SWA, and then SWA going underwater. Which we aren't.

What we're talking about is an AT pilot leaving AT for SWA (which is something many AT pilots, hundreds, in fact, were trying to do), and then finding themselves junior to and receiving less longevity credit than the fellow AT pilot, who, by the way, also upgraded to captain due to higher AT attrition, and subsequently had his captain seat protected out of seniority.

Not one of you peanut gallery types can honestly say that it is fair for a pilot who left AT to come to the better contract, better stability, better pay of SWA, to be dealt a worse deal in an acquisition SLI with AT than if he had simply stayed at AT and gotten the SWA job through acquisition. But that is what those guys were facing with SL9. Those guys will be heard in arbitration, as they should be. Many here are very content with your uppity MEC shooting this thing down.

 

[Sacha]

Ah, Flightinfo . . .

One part of your group says that ALPA is sabotaging this because they want to continue to receive our dues, the other half thinks we are too expensive, and ALPA will jettison us.

The truth is that the SIA we were presented with did not pass muster with our MEC, and we continue to work within the Process Agreement signed by the four parties. There are no black helicopters with Herndon, VA plates hovering over Dallas . . . There are no secret marching orders . . . The MEC voted it down because the majority of our pilots didn't feel that a 32% seniority haircut was "fair and equitable".

Nice redirect. The question still stands. Or does it worry you a little bit?