Airtran-Swa. out of seniority?

[scoreboardII]

PCL, even the no voters are now yes voters.

GL, SWA was coming after ATL, by hook or crook, they want 45-50% domestic market, they are going to get it or die trying.

 

[PCL_128]

PCL, even the no voters are now yes voters.

Was that supposed to be profound or something? Because it doesn't make any sense.

they want 45-50% domestic market

Yeah, they want a lot of things, but they've proven themselves to be pretty incompetent at actually accomplishing any of it. An IT department perpetually stuck in 1979, a CEO delusional enough to believe that an airline can achieve 15% ROIC (or should even care about it in the first place), a flight ops department that does things just "because that's how we've always done it," and the list goes on. This place wouldn't even be profitable right now if it weren't for AirTran's baggage fees, let alone the huge cost advantage they're getting by putting us on a B-scale. The idea that they could have invaded Atlanta and gone head to head with both AirTran and Delta is just laughable.

BTW, how's that single engine taxi coming? Still need another 12 months to "train" for it?

 

[Flyer1015]

let alone the huge cost advantage they're getting by putting us on a B-scale.

Didn't SLI method #1 you (guys) turned down bring equal pay pretty much right away? Sounds like the B-scale was created by SLI method #2.

 

[humveedriver]

Didn't SLI method #1 you (guys) turned down bring equal pay pretty much right away? Sounds like the B-scale was created by SLI method #2.

It was a classic case of saying will you sell your seniority? Most of us believed that we should never have been put in that situation. But that's what GK wanted. He wanted us to sell our seniority for pay parity and a bunch of rediculous conditions and restrictions. Many folks agree that the MEC did the right thing turning it down, and just as many think it should have been put out to a vote. I don't remember any of it being an easy decision.

 

[scoreboardII]

Was that supposed to be profound or something? Because it doesn't make any sense.



Yeah, they want a lot of things, but they've proven themselves to be pretty incompetent at actually accomplishing any of it. An IT department perpetually stuck in 1979, a CEO delusional enough to believe that an airline can achieve 15% ROIC (or should even care about it in the first place), a flight ops department that does things just "because that's how we've always done it," and the list goes on. This place wouldn't even be profitable right now if it weren't for AirTran's baggage fees, let alone the huge cost advantage they're getting by putting us on a B-scale. The idea that they could have invaded Atlanta and gone head to head with both AirTran and Delta is just laughable.

BTW, how's that single engine taxi coming? Still need another 12 months to "train" for it?

Profound? Simply it means no matter how you voted, the yes vote won, so now you get to deal with it just like the yes voter.

Pretty incompetent? They only managed to kill every major out there, according most on this site, sure, nothing but incompetence here. That doesn't mean I don't agree with most of your thoughts, but that one is just wrong.

And yes, SWA would have killed AT in a head to head fight. Lets be intellectually honest, they did kill AT. Still laughing?

 

[PCL_128]

Profound? Simply it means no matter how you voted, the yes vote won, so now you get to deal with it just like the yes voter.

Which isn't remotely the same as us all being yes voters. Sorry, but I'm no yes voter. I may be stuck with it, but I'll be a proud no voter forever.

Pretty incompetent? They only managed to kill every major out there, according most on this site, sure, nothing but incompetence here. That doesn't mean I don't agree with most of your thoughts, but that one is just wrong.

Yes, incompetent. You can't keep pointing to successes of years past and claim that they're relevant now. They aren't. Regardless of past success, SWA is struggling right now. Again, without AirTran's ancillary revenue, SWA would have its first money losing year in three decades. It's time to examine why that is and make the corrections. Start with the backwards ass IT department that is holding us all back in an embarrassing fashion.

And yes, SWA would have killed AT in a head to head fight. Lets be intellectually honest, they did kill AT. Still laughing?

Yep, I'm still laughing. Laughing at the arrogance that will be your downfall.

 

[ATLplt]

And yes, SWA would have killed AT in a head to head fight. Lets be intellectually honest, they did kill AT. Still laughing?

Do you put your purple and orange pom poms away when you're beating it to Gary's head shot?

 

[scoreboardII]

Not arrogance, just a fact.

Again, without AirTran's ancillary revenue, SWA would have its first money losing year in three decades. It's time to examine why that is and make the corrections.

You obviously have little knowledge of accounting principles. If SWA never heard of AT or was fighting head to head, do you think they would have slowed the purchase of somethings to still show a profit? Yep.

I have no beef that it's messed up, that they could have done it better, that the IT department needs a pink slip. Just remember, their your IT dpeartment now.

But your ignorance of the facts on the ground that AT will be gone Jan 1 2015 is just a river in Egypt, Denial of the truth SWA would have kicked AT's butt, and did.

 

[PCL_128]

Not arrogance, just a fact.

You'll get your comeuppance. Only a matter of time.

 

[scoreboardII]

Well, who will feel the comeuppance first if your lower on the list than I then huh?