AirTran thoughts on Kelly's Disposal of SL10

[ATLplt]

This could be a possible compromise:

If SWA does not comply with the CBA and Side letter that they also signed,
the AT transition guys SHOULD NOT be allowed to upgrade starting 1 Jan 2015.

Not great for the AAI pilots on the SWA side of the transition come 01JAN2015, but good for the AAI guys on the other side of the partition...it may keep the natives quiet...

Except for the fact that the "natives" are now comprised of former AT guys on the SWA side and represented by SWAPA. Why should they not be able to hold Captain if their seniority allows it?

 

[vixin]

I'm not sure why any of you are surprised. I said this almost 2 months ago...

I dont either. There were some of us giving scenarios like this before SL10 was voted on. We were told to basically shut up and color. SWAPULL knows what is best for us.

 

[BR715]

Listen to yourselves! It just goes to show you how much of a circus this has all become.

 

[scoreboardII]

The only reasonable compromise then is to to keep the CA upgrade partition in place as long as a 717 flies in AT colors.

 

[dicko]

The only reasonable compromise then is to to keep the CA upgrade partition in place as long as a 717 flies in AT colors.

Except for the fact that there are already agreements in place that;

a. Allow former AirTran pilots to upgrade on the SWA side according to their global seniority after Jan 2015, and

b. Do not allow a Bump and Flush on the 717 Captain list.

The question is; can SWAPA change these agreements without the agreement of AirTran pilots ? Perhaps somebody with a better understanding of the AirTran agreements can answer that ....

 

[Crash Pad]

I'm not sure why any of you are surprised. I said this almost 2 months ago...

I called the 717 sale a long time ago and you were shocked.

You also thought AIP1 had to be killed... then you went to Dallas and suddenly it wasn't such a bad deal.

 

[humveedriver]

The only reasonable compromise then is to to keep the CA upgrade partition in place as long as a 717 flies in AT colors.

Under the current agreement if there is an AirTran pilot still flying a "white" airplane (that's what swa management calls it), then on 1 Jan 2015 a magic wand gets waved and now that pilot is a SWAPA represented pilot earning SWAPA wages. Remember that was original plan under AIP2. SC is the one who sent out his "victory" message about the 717 leaving early. Like Gary told us, we haven't violated the agreement.

 

[Citrusflyer]

The only reasonable compromise then is to to keep the CA upgrade partition in place as long as a 717 flies in AT colors.

Wishful thinking ... As GC said to the AT guys, "the agreement is in place, it's not going to change." SWAPA will have to live with it as well - the good and the bad.

 

[Lear70]

I called the 717 sale a long time ago and you were shocked.

You also thought AIP1 had to be killed... then you went to Dallas and suddenly it wasn't such a bad deal.

Au contraire mon frer. The first deal was a steaming pile of crap. It just stank less than the 2nd deal done under threat of our careers (which still sucks).

But don't let reality stand in the way of rewriting history.

We should have been allowed to go to arbitration with integration per the Process Agreeement that everyone signed. If we had, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

And no, incidentally, you can't preclude the AAI CA's who can hold it from upgrading come 2015 any more than the guy trying to upgrade now can. It's all there in black and white and I find it more than just a little disingenuous that our 717 CA seats go away and we should just take it, but if the 717's stay past 2015 suddenly SWAPA pilots are entitled to something.

You can't make this sh*t up...

 

[redflyer65]

It's a Section 1 scope violation after Jan 1, 2015 I believe. You can appreciate that Lear. We on the SWAPA side signed off on scope relief with this deal and it's all intertwined. Will the sticker idea work after that date? Who knows.

As far as the difference between Agreement 1 and 2, the Airtran guys lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the MEC. It should have been voted on by the pilots, plain and simple.

On top of your assertion that it should have gone to arbitration, the AAI MEC tried hard to run out the clock in that regard. We waited day after day for them to decide what they wanted to do. I have the feeling they knew exactly what they were doing, and so did Gary most likely.

The only thing that SWAPA pilots think they are entitled to are Section One protections that we voted on.

Same as getting rid of your Skywest codeshare and the sticker on the AAI 737.

 

[vixin]

Just like AAI pilots want want want some more. Just like you want something for not abiding to the contract so do SWAPA pilots. We should all band together and tell GK to shove it where the sun dont shine, but that would be to monumental to get the two groups to form as one.

 

[PCL_128]

I have the feeling they knew exactly what they were doing

Now that's funny!

 

[redflyer65]

The part about running out the clock? You have a different opinion?

 

[PCL_128]

The part about running out the clock? You have a different opinion?

Yes, it's called inexperience. The idea that they had some sort of diabolical master plan to hold things up is fantasy. They just didn't know what the hell they were doing.

 

[waveflyer]

Please, the king of delay pretending that he wasn't trying to delay delay is the fantasy. Though I agree with inexperience too. But I have to wonder, what in your resume PCL allows you to lecture anyone on experience.

But so glad you're still thinking AT's mistake was not being hardcore enough...

 

[humveedriver]

It's a Section 1 scope violation after Jan 1, 2015 I believe. You can appreciate that Lear. We on the SWAPA side signed off on scope relief with this deal and it's all intertwined. Will the sticker idea work after that date? Who knows.

As far as the difference between Agreement 1 and 2, the Airtran guys lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the MEC. It should have been voted on by the pilots, plain and simple.

On top of your assertion that it should have gone to arbitration, the AAI MEC tried hard to run out the clock in that regard. We waited day after day for them to decide what they wanted to do. I have the feeling they knew exactly what they were doing, and so did Gary most likely.

The only thing that SWAPA pilots think they are entitled to are Section One protections that we voted on.

Same as getting rid of your Skywest codeshare and the sticker on the AAI 737.

So what kind of time table are we looking at here? Let's say for the next two years we don't become one SWAPA family? DEC 31 comes and goes and the pilots of the 36 717 aircraft are still ALPA. Or SWAPA flying a non SWA airplane. How long to file and see that greivance through? I'm thinking the planes will be gone before it gets to arbitration.

 

[redflyer65]

I'm not sure Humvee. It's still complete speculation at this point with it being over 2 years away. If I were king, everyone would be SWAPA Jan 1, 2015 (or sooner) regardless and all working together.....717's still on property or not. There is still plenty of time to work out the details, whether it's SWAPA issues or issues from guys on the other side of the partition.

 

[Lear70]

It's a Section 1 scope violation after Jan 1, 2015 I believe. You can appreciate that Lear. We on the SWAPA side signed off on scope relief with this deal and it's all intertwined. Will the sticker idea work after that date? Who knows.

As far as the difference between Agreement 1 and 2, the Airtran guys lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the MEC. It should have been voted on by the pilots, plain and simple.

In retrospect, it would have been better for our pilots, although I'm not certain at all that SL9 would have passed SWA vote, but I really didn't intend to start an SIA 1 -vs- SIA 2 argument, just reiterating that for every SIA 1 argument there's the arbitration counter-argument.

The only thing that SWAPA pilots think they are entitled to are Section One protections that we voted on.

Same as getting rid of your Skywest codeshare and the sticker on the AAI 737.

Oh I don't blame you for fighting this issue, just as we are fighting what the 717 deal with Delta has done to our CA seats, which was the crux of the entire agreement.

I don't fault SWAPA one bit for pursuing this issue. What I take issue with is one of the other poster's "idea" of trying to FURTHER PUNISH AirTran pilots by saying a "fair" alternative would be, if the 717's are still at AAI in violation of the Agreement on 1/1/15, then no former-AAI Captains can upgrade at SWA. That really is a non-starter.

Your relief should and will come from your management. Not from AAI pilots. Other than that, I applaud your enforcement of your CBA, just don't do it off the backs of our pilots, that's all.

 

[PCL_128]

Not only is it a non-starter, it's also a blatant DFR violation. Whether SWAPA likes it or not, they now represent former AirTran captains who have the seniority for upgrade. Artificially delaying their upgrade even further will be a clear DFR problem for them, and I doubt SWAPA carries enough insurance to cover that judgment.

 

[redflyer65]

In retrospect, it would have been better for our pilots, although I'm not certain at all that SL9 would have passed SWA vote, but I really didn't intend to start an SIA 1 -vs- SIA 2 argument, just reiterating that for every SIA 1 argument there's the arbitration counter-argument.


Oh I don't blame you for fighting this issue, just as we are fighting what the 717 deal with Delta has done to our CA seats, which was the crux of the entire agreement.

I don't fault SWAPA one bit for pursuing this issue. What I take issue with is one of the other poster's "idea" of trying to FURTHER PUNISH AirTran pilots by saying a "fair" alternative would be, if the 717's are still at AAI in violation of the Agreement on 1/1/15, then no former-AAI Captains can upgrade at SWA. That really is a non-starter.

Your relief should and will come from your management. Not from AAI pilots. Other than that, I applaud your enforcement of your CBA, just don't do it off the backs of our pilots, that's all.

Agreed. As far as I'm concerned, those that can hold upgrade after 1/1/15 should be able to upgrade. The list should be the list after that date without any restrictions. And I didn't think you were trying to go down that road again, it doesn't really serve much purpose. Water under the bridge.

 

[Skyboy722]

This is a section 1 scope issue, and the sticker idea won't work, as WN does not have a 717 program. They would need it all; training program, mx program, flt ops, manuals, the whole nine yards. Not as simple as giving them all WN ID's and slapping a sticker on the plane.

 

[FIREMAN]

This is a section 1 scope issue, and the sticker idea won't work, as WN does not have a 717 program. They would need it all; training program, mx program, flt ops, manuals, the whole nine yards. Not as simple as giving them all WN ID's and slapping a sticker on the plane.

The plan approved by the FFA before SOC had SWA B717 after 12/31/2014.

 

[Bake]

What does the Future Farmers of America (FFA) have to do with any of this? I knew it, the sheep screwers would mess it all up.

 

[FIREMAN]

What does the Future Farmers of America (FFA) have to do with any of this? I knew it, the sheep screwers would mess it all up.

That is where GK got all the BS in this whole debacal.

 

[runfast]

At what point do the two pilot groups realize that there are real advantages to be joined together under one union? There have been a lot of fences built during this process , most of which are going to need relief from one side or another to get some of these problems solved. Nobody wins with a B scale, indefinite domestic code share, etc....

 

[ASADFW7]

As I see it, if SL-10 is not honored by SWA, then the SLI is not valid at the day it is violated. On January 2, 2015, all AAI pilot not SWA pilots will have to be renegotiated into the SWA seniority list. Why would the SLI still be used once it is violated?

 

[GIZMONC]

This was posted on another blog site:

FROM SWAPA PRESIDENT:

Fellow SWAPA Pilots,

Hot summer. Hot airplanes. Hot topics.

Since the announcement of the 717 deal with Delta, Gary has made several public statements that have raised questions about the Company's intent to comply with provisions in our Collective Bargaining Agreement. As you recall, Side Letter 10 requires that all AirTran pilots be transitioned to Southwest Airlines, and that the AirTran side of the partition cease to exist no later than December 31, 2014. Effective January 1, 2015 all pilots (both Southwest and Airtran) will be working under one contract; the SWAPA contract will be in effect on that date. All provisions of our contract will apply to the entire fleet and pilot group.

As a result of the Company's agreement with Delta to transfer all but 36 717s by the end of 2014, I sent a letter to Gary asking specifically if their intent was to comply with the contract, and the deadline to complete the transition. Gary responded promptly and confirmed to me that the remaining AirTran aircraft would be transitioned after the December 31, 2014 deadline. To be more specific, he stated it was their "present intent and desire to retain the 717s in the AirTran fleet until they are transitioned to Delta, a process that should be completed by the end of 2015."

I believe it is crucial that our contract is honored; all of it including SL 10. While I certainly believe that we may be able to find a mutually agreeable solution to this complex problem, at this time we are not in agreement and the Company has offered no solution regarding their intent to not comply with SL 10. Our contract uses words like "shall" and "will", not "should" for the same reason the Company used those words in areas where they demand compliance. Absent a membership-ratified solution, the Company must comply with our CBA, to include Side Letter 10.

We felt this matter deserved your attention. Know that SWAPA is exercising diligence in addressing this issue. As developments arise, we will keep you updated in a timely manner.
Fly safe,

 

[Kharma Police]

At what point do the two pilot groups realize that there are real advantages to be joined together under one union? There have been a lot of fences built during this process , most of which are going to need relief from one side or another to get some of these problems solved. Nobody wins with a B scale, indefinite domestic code share, etc....

The Real Southwest Pilots voted down single representation a few months ago. Wish you posted this earlier.......

 

[Lear70]

As I see it, if SL-10 is not honored by SWA, then the SLI is not valid at the day it is violated. On January 2, 2015, all AAI pilot not SWA pilots will have to be renegotiated into the SWA seniority list. Why would the SLI still be used once it is violated?

Because I designed it that way.

No, seriously.

We had just come back from reaching the Agreement In Principle and we were hammering out small details in the union office over the phone with SWA and SWAPA just two days before the MEC meeting to announce the deal specifics and it occurred to me that, with the ORIGINAL wording of the Seniority Integration Agreement, on 1/1/15, EVERYTHING dropped dead, including the non-furlough clause, no probation for AAI pilots, all of it.

Like I've said before, I always thought the transition schedule was optimistic given then international piece of the equation and Southwest's reluctance to use an outside vendor, and questioned the feasibility of a 1/1/15 completion date from the beginning with the way they wanted to do the transition.

I immediately went in to the Merger Committee's room (the NC and MC were working separately on our pieces of the presentation) and pointed out the glaring flaw in the language and quickly wrote the extra piece that says "on 1/1/15 OR WHEN THE LAST AIRTRAN PILOT TRANSITIONS TO SOUTHWEST, whichever happens LATER". Jack then conference called with Russ McCrady who then called SWAPA. They talked among themselves while we were on hold, then came back and agreed to it; it was the last piece of the puzzle before final documents were signed and faxed back and forth and originals FedEx'd.

As a result, we now have an agreement with an inviolability clause that says several things, but among them:

1. If one piece of the agreement is found by arbitration or lawsuit to be illegal, the rest of the agreement will still stand. One successfully-challenged issue doesn't negate the rest of the agreement, which is standard legalese in almost every contract across all industries and segments these days.

2. The items that were mutually-agreed by all three parties cannot be modified by any later negotiations solely between SWA and SWAPA or SWA and AAI ALPA; it takes all 3 parties to change ANYTHING in the Agreement unless very SPECIFICALLY stated otherwise (like the extension of the 1/1/15 date - SWA and SWAPA control that alone, AAI ALPA isn't a party to EXTEND that date).

3. On 1/1/15, if the transition isn't done, the Agreement remains in force until the last AAI pilot transitions, which includes a no-furlough clause, and the ability to transition as a CA if their seniority can then hold it since SL10 has a specific expiration date attached to that preclusion.

The Agreement is what the Agreement is. By all means, enforce your Scope language, but you won't harm any AAI pilots in the process. We specifically designed it that way as much as we possibly could. I'm still a little shocked that the "ideas" being offered by SWA pilots still hammer AAI pilots again and again rather than coming up with ideas that require management to fix the issue THEY created.

We're going to have to work together for a long, long time to come. How about coming up with ideas that don't screw the other group?

Just a thought.

 

[fam62c]

There won't be any seats to bid, as I understand it. No flush bid.

I'm also betting on 20-30 international 737's on 1/1/2015, but who knows?

That would be interesting because after 1/1/15 AT pilots can bid SW vacancies without restriction. As SW guys retire AT 737 pilots may choose to bid to the SW side for better schedules, pay credit, bases and QOL in general. While it's true that after 1/1/15 AT pilots will have the SW contract some pilots may not want to stay on the AT side as it winds down and as it stands now there is nothing to require them to do so. SW might have a problem if they have international ops still on the AT side after 1/1/15.

Time for the AT folks to just sit back and give this situation some time rather than being too quick to agree to give SW more flexibility. SW created this situation, let them stew in it for awhile. The AT guys are on the list and that can't be changed so the big gun has been removed for the heads of the AT pilots. No reason to play ball if you aren't allowed to be part of the team, don't sell Manhattan for beads