AirTran Road show Pairings

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

BEL370
Who cares what the pairing do. With what was given up in scope we our not going to fly it anyways. But you must be one of those 10% CA looking for the pay out, and doesnt care who you throw under the bus.

 

[Lear70]

becasue if the 717 is replaced (would take years) you could also see the senior guys would go to the 737 and 717s to Midwest and you and me will be E190 FO's or Capts on reserve. That is just as plausable but possible under this contract and we could do NOTHING about it. That is a fact, but think as you will.

No, those events are NOT plausible, with the exception of you and Ty becoming E-190 CA's.

First, you're buying into the fear mongering about Midwest. It is an ESTABLISHED FACT that we can FORCE the company to combine operations by a single carrier petition once the purchase is complete, here's the precedent:

http://www.nmb.gov/representation/deter2006/33n041.pdf

There's others as well, do a Google search, you'll find them. The only way the company could whipsaw us is to keep Midwest operating separately as a wholly-owned subsidiary NOT under the AirTran name, and the 8K SEC filings prohibit them from doing that.

THERE IS NO IMPROVED MERGER PROTECTION. Period.

Could you be E-190 pilots under the current CBA? Sure. At 717 pay rates. There's no way they can operate the airplane CURRENTLY paying less than that, so who cares, as long as you make the same money? I certainly don't.

Lastly, to address your first post, the pairing generator: take a GOOD, CLOSE LOOK at those pairings. I have. You'll find they have ONE thing in common:

THEY COULD BE CONSTRUCTED USING OUR CURRENT RIGS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE COMPANY!

That's right, take a good, close look. Only a VERY small percentage of those lines has over a 12 hour duty day, you said it yourself. So why do we need to give all those things up to have trips constructed like this NOW?

The answer: we don't. It's smoke and mirrors. The company doesn't build pairings like this FOR A REASON. Do we know absolutely why that is? No. But to buy into the pairings without a healthy dose of skepticism borders on the inanely ignorant.

Most of us have been on the receiving end of bad reassignments enough to know that, with relaxed constraints, they WILL take advantage of it when necessary.

Incidentally, I flew a 27:43 hour 4-day last week under current rigs that was completely commutable with 14 and 18 hour overnights. I have a 19:20 3-day later this month commutable with 12 and 16 hour overnights. Both of those actually work too hard for me, I prefer 2-3 legs a day with 18-20 hour overnights, as I don't feel like being BURNED OUT when I'm 50. If they want to work us like SWA pilots, they can pay us like SWA pilots.

 

[Ty Webb]

Well my Tybert, get your head out of the Hustler and power down the Media player with the gay porn and understand it is not the 717 guys who could be hosed but you and me

Hmmm . . . . a reference to gay porn, and scare tactics . . . . Noel, is that you?


.

 

[BFL370]

Some how I bet all you guys havnt even gone to the show, do what you will and no Im not a senior guy. Good Luck.

 

[BFL370]

Arent Omni, ATA and World now owned by one holding company, so are Polar and Atlas and none are being combined.

 

[Lear70]

Some how I bet all you guys havnt even gone to the show, do what you will and no Im not a senior guy. Good Luck.

Yes, I have.

Twice.

And they absolutely COULD NOT answer the questions I put to them with other than, "You're right, that's a concession" or "You're right, there's nothing keeping them from doing that."

The only thing they can say is, "We don't *THINK* they'll do that."

Sorry, that's just NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Put it in writing. If you can't, then I'm not interested, as I can't take "we don't think they'll do that" to arbitration during the grievance process.

Incidentally, why are you so closed off to opposing opinions? Why have you made up your mind getting only one side of the story? Why don't you read this, then read the contract again side-by-side with the analysis in this link, then let us know how you answer these issues:

http://home.earthlink.net/~lear70

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Nope, He's not a senior guy, just a management SHILL.

 

[BFL370]

Well I do have some differnt points of vew, but you disagree with me so be it.

 

[Lear70]

Arent Omni, ATA and World now owned by one holding company, so are Polar and Atlas and none are being combined.

They're not being operated under one name for common carriage, that's the link.

If a carrier purchases another company and combines the operation under one name for the purpose of common carriage, then single carrier petitions work, there's about half a dozen precedents in the last 5 years.

AirTran has made way too many public statements and SEC filings saying they intend to do away with the Midwest name and operate everything as AirTran to get away with operating them separately. Lots of federal laws prohibiting a public company from making statements to sneak a purchase through then change later how they intend to operate it.

Citation Lover got me thinking about it, and an ALPA buddy in Herndon who does this for a living put me on this research track with the above results. He's not concerned and neither am I; our merger protections in our current CBA aren't perfect, but they're good enough for the way AAI has set this up with Midwest as a purchase and "merger".

 

[Lear70]

Well I do have some differnt points of vew, but you disagree with me so be it.

And I understand your point of view, the pay rates are actually "decent", not great, weighted heavily towards the top 1/3 of the seniority list, but at least "possibly livable" if they hadn't screwed Scope, Insurance, Work Rules, Reserves, New-Hires, and Retirees...

I appreciate you at least looking at the countering arguments I've presented, and of course, you are always welcome to vote your conscience, it's a free country...

My main point is that current book is better than what is proposed, as it threw too many people under the bus and doesn't have enough protections built in. It's not the end of the company, just the end of this round of negotiations.

Time for round 2. :beer: