Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have the feeling they knew exactly what they were doing
The part about running out the clock? You have a different opinion?
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.