American at Love: Faking Angina

[Bosley]

I agree. But first, we need hear some more whining from Delta telling us how wonderful they are.

Do you ever have anything nice to say to delta or the delta pilots?? Sheeeeeeeesh!

 

[fox51ramprat]

aa73,

I agree that since we have little to do with the sucess or failure of our companies

I feel that the employees have a lot to do with the success of Southwest. Everything you read about the company talks about putting the employees first and getting huge returns. I don't even work there yet and I've already figured this out.

An AMR friend told me that the employees have been telling management that they need to be more productive and do things that make sense. Management responds by spending gobs of money to hire a consulting firm that comes back with the answwer..."You need to be more productive and do things differently" The culture of the two airlines is polar opposite. I do not understand why AA is moving some ops to Love when they could just lower fares from DFW. They do this and then want to talk with APA about the future and what the union is going to do to help out.

 

[aa73]

Fox51,

I think you JUST MIGHT have cracked the code on how they do things at AMR!

 

[T45Flyer]

Piggybacking on what Chase and AA73 have said. We at SWA are very fortunate to have a great leadership team in the front office. It is very easy to get caught up in the emotion and esprite de corps and forget who we are.

I really enjoy talking to pilots from other airlines on our jumpseat. As a very smart man once said "Be careful how you treat others on your rise to the top, because you will see those same people on your way back down." Cheers.

 

[Dave Benjamin]

That is a good one coming from a SWA guy. Here are just a few examples I can think of showing how SWA HATES to compete, and tries every trick in the book to avoid competition:

1. Flies out of Midway, not OHare
2. Scared of flying out of DEN (until recently) uses Springs instead
3. Tries to get approval to fly out of Boeing Field because too many airlines already fly out of Sea-Tac
4. Monopoly on Love Field, starts to cry when another airlines tries to move in

i am sure there are a ton more....

Does Southwest serve Springs, as in Colorado Springs? (COS)

Why should Southwest serve ORD if MDW serves them well?

 

[chase]

fox51ramprat,

You're observations are in line with what I see when I talk to employees at SWA & listen to those who work at other carriers...here's a "for example" in terms of how SWA is dealing with a problem.

Turn times are a real concern for SWA...adding 5 minutes to every turn for the 3000+ flights that we have would require another 40 airplanes for purchasing....therefore turn times are key to our productivity (anyone's for that matter) so keeping those tight is important. The dilemma is that tight turn times means baggage problems can arrise. SWA's baggage success/failure as measured by DOT is not where they wish to have it right now...too many mistakes....60% of the lost bags never get on the aircraft because of mishandling at the sorting locations (T-point) or because the bag doesn't get identified properly at the counter & never makes it to the T point on time)...major mistakes that needed to be fixed.

SWA hired some consultants (even SWA does this) & along with SWA employees began to look very hard at the operations in PHX on how to make the turns more productive & minimize lost baggage (just one aspect of the experiment out there but it illustrates how something simple, people, were used to fixed the problem). I asked the person (senior person involved with the process, not a worker bee BTW)I was speaking what was the single most important thing that changed the "process" to make it more efficient? BTW, they cut down on the losses by a significant enough amount to implement the changes...coming to LAS very soon I'm told.

His response was typical of any good leadership technique "if" you have the proper culture/people in place to implement. "We simply drew attention to the problem, told folks we wanted to hold folks accountable & then we made it public for everyone to see each "teams" performance record for all to see as it relates to moving the bags efficiently." How did they do that? They simply instituted a simple process that showed each teams performance spanning a specific timeframe that showed with colors the % of bags that were lost that could be attributed to that "team" who was on duty at the time. Capturing the data was a challenge but at the end of the day & after the test, the employees "wanted" to do their best, it was in plain sight for all to see if they didn't. Peer pressure, pride of workmanship & most important, someone looking each employee in the eye & saying, "your responsible & everyone is watching your performance...don't let us down, we're counting on you to do your part, we need your help" appears to be the management solution.

Not a lot of bells & whistles but a reigniting of the flame of "pride of ownership" I believe that is found in each employee, it simply has to be tapped in to in the proper way. I hope we can do that at other stations & in other areas also....we will need to do that to keep our produtivity up, costs down & efficiency high. Just one illustration at how a problem could be dealt with...it will take time for our numbers to improve in the DOT monthly ratings I'm sure but I think from talking to this individual the groundwork has been laid & will hopefully be successful. Not trying to blow SWA's horn, this technique isn't unique or universally applied just at SWA...I think AA has attempted some of the same types of accountability measures at AA & it has been productive...my apologies for rambling & taking up too much cyberspace for those with short attention span (like mine!)....cheers.

 

[Flopgut]

I have a pretty bad rap on here. I'm sorry. I am not anti SWA. I hope each and every SWA employee continues to enjoy stable and rewarding employment. If any of you were flat broke, broke up, or broke down, I would help you. I just want to see things characterized in their proper respect. Is SWA really that great? Or is what has happened to legacy airlines actually that bad? How is history going to portray things that are happening now? Chases' comments are great, but we sugar coat this economic downturn like it is something normal. As though every event of the last 4.5 years is something we could have prepared for or studied in business school. Nearly every media outlet heralds the success of LCCs and simultaneously assails the legacies like we are some stinking vagrant in the gutter. There is a subtle gleam in the eye of every business news talking head when they speak about lost pensions and dwindling pay and benefits. There is an active lack of challenge to this accepted half truth about how great LCCs are for this country. It is all wrong. Chase: I know you think SWA is just reacting to the market; I think it is more like looting.

The market seems to want to rid itself of the legacy airline. Replace it with the LCC. I don't think that is a good thing from a big picture standpoint. Example: DAL vs. SWA. DAL just ranked in Forbes.com as one of this country's most charitable corporations. Now if there is one airline that you would think would be on this list, you would think it would be SWA. Hardly, I can't even find them on there. (maybe they made the list somewhere, someone find them if you can) Conversely, if you look for corporate charity to be ranked, what does jump out at you is that among large cities, Dallas is ranked as one of the poorest examples of corporate giving. (you will find that AA had to reneg on a bit of giving they had commited to, AA still outpaces SWA in that they offer a way to convert mileage rewards into charitable donations) I guess that what the market is saying is that DAL needs to stop leading airlines in the philanthropy department. Is this a good thing? Good for DAL for trying, sad for SWA I'm afraid.

In the words of Sir Charles: "I might be wrong, but I doubt it". If I am wrong in the least bit, I will beg for an apology.

 

[scoreboard]

Hardly

I have a pretty bad rap on here. I'm sorry. I am not anti SWA. I hope each and every SWA employee continues to enjoy stable and rewarding employment. If any of you were flat broke, broke up, or broke down, I would help you. I just want to see things characterized in their proper respect. Is SWA really that great? Or is what has happened to legacy airlines actually that bad? How is history going to portray things that are happening now? Chases' comments are great, but we sugar coat this economic downturn like it is something normal. As though every event of the last 4.5 years is something we could have prepared for or studied in business school. Nearly every media outlet heralds the success of LCCs and simultaneously assails the legacies like we are some stinking vagrant in the gutter. There is a subtle gleam in the eye of every business news talking head when they speak about lost pensions and dwindling pay and benefits. There is an active lack of challenge to this accepted half truth about how great LCCs are for this country. It is all wrong. Chase: I know you think SWA is just reacting to the market; I think it is more like looting.

The market seems to want to rid itself of the legacy airline. Replace it with the LCC. I don't think that is a good thing from a big picture standpoint. Example: DAL vs. SWA. DAL just ranked in Forbes.com as one of this country's most charitable corporations. Now if there is one airline that you would think would be on this list, you would think it would be SWA. Hardly, I can't even find them on there. (maybe they made the list somewhere, someone find them if you can) Conversely, if you look for corporate charity to be ranked, what does jump out at you is that among large cities, Dallas is ranked as one of the poorest examples of corporate giving. (you will find that AA had to reneg on a bit of giving they had commited to, AA still outpaces SWA in that they offer a way to convert mileage rewards into charitable donations) I guess that what the market is saying is that DAL needs to stop leading airlines in the philanthropy department. Is this a good thing? Good for DAL for trying, sad for SWA I'm afraid.

In the words of Sir Charles: "I might be wrong, but I doubt it". If I am wrong in the least bit, I will beg for an apology.

Flop, You actually had me thinking for the first 3/4's of your first paragraph that you possesed a modicum of decency, only to dash it with the assumption that we at SWA are looters. Well done. Now the response.

First, when you go shopping for a Chevy or Ford or whatever brand you choose, do you go to the dealer that charges the most? Didn't think so.

Second, how is it the "truth" that LCC's are bad for the country? I and many await your response.

Third, regarding Forbes, good for DAL . Now the rest of the story. You have stated how you like to game your system to fly min hours in a month to get max pay. Charitable? Just because we as a company don't rate on a list, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Ronald McDonald House, Toys for Tots, Cancer runs, HEB food drives, Adopt a Pilot. All of these well sponsered by SWA and its PEOPLE. SWA doesn't just give bucks, we give our hearts and most importantly our time. Do you?

 

[CaptainJaguar]

deleted

 

[Flybet3]

I can tell you exactly what happened at Dallas love...how do I know? because I worked at the ramp for american at Dallas love, but after 9/11 they took us back to DFW, and myself and all those low seniority guys where laid off within a week....loved that job

 

[Flopgut]

Scorecard: I take NO pleasure in pointing this out. Another SWA type on another thread corrected me and told me SWA was not like WalMart, but rather more like Microsoft. So I decided to check it out a little. Because I had just read how Bill and Melinda Gates had decided to contribute 150 million per year for forever to try to stamp out world infant mortality. So I was sure I was going to find great things about SWA's charity work because why else would that poster make that claim? Well, its pretty sad. WalMart does more than you. But I did think I would find that no other US airline would be recognized meaningfully...low and behold...there is Delta! The same legacy being assailed in this thread (one of them). I think it is amazing that DAL can make that kind of commitment in these tough times. Good for them!

Evidently, Dallas is an abyss of corporate charity donations. And I guess SWA is Dallas' largest employers (according to a SWA someone who was grilling me). I feel inclined to give AA some relief on this issue, actually, I was ready to only see SWA as the single US airline to engage in corporate charity, so this is still a surprise. AA does make it available directly through the website to donate your miles to a number of affiliated charities. This is not the case with SWA. With Rapid Rewards you have to do the leg work; It is just like you are giving the ticket to a friend. SWA does none of the work for you except during Katrina through the Red Cross, but it is not a permanent deal.

I have looked at this pretty close and I think I'm right. But it does not feel like it could be right. Honestly, SWA has got to be the number one benevolent airline company in the US...Right? If you are not, something is wrong. Low fares are not charity.

If I'm shown to be wrong on this delicate issue, I will crawl (figuratively speaking) to the SWA people on here with the humblest of apologies.

In the mean time, if you want to stop pi$$ing me off, every SWA employee can stop talking about horrible world events like it is just some business phenomenon (chase, 3+ times in this thread). Your 100th year of profitability will not be as significant as the day AA can restore their own profitability and recall every furloughed employee.

Happy Holidays.

 

[vc10]

Low fares are not charity? Of course not, they're better than charity. They leave more money in the pockets of customers, who are therefore able to devote more of their own funds to charity, if they so choose.

The idea that a legacy major is somehow virtuous for bending over passengers and then taking a small amount of the proceeds and tossing it into the collection cup is completely absurd.

In Europe the last decade there are a ton of stories of folks who've fallen in love and gotten married---with this relationship possible only because a low cost carrier was flying between the cities where they lived. Customers appreciate low prices. They enable people to do things they could never contemplate otherwise. That's why Southwest has that Freedom motif in its tag lines. And it's true. Heck, I had a friend once who lived in ABQ and worked by LAX, possible because of Southwest's low fares.

The great thing about low fares is that you don't have to be a pilot to commute...

Scorecard: I take NO pleasure in pointing this out. Another SWA type on another thread corrected me and told me SWA was not like WalMart, but rather more like Microsoft. So I decided to check it out a little. Because I had just read how Bill and Melinda Gates had decided to contribute 150 million per year for forever to try to stamp out world infant mortality. So I was sure I was going to find great things about SWA's charity work because why else would that poster make that claim? Well, its pretty sad. WalMart does more than you. But I did think I would find that no other US airline would be recognized meaningfully...low and behold...there is Delta! The same legacy being assailed in this thread (one of them). I think it is amazing that DAL can make that kind of commitment in these tough times. Good for them!

Evidently, Dallas is an abyss of corporate charity donations. And I guess SWA is Dallas' largest employers (according to a SWA someone who was grilling me). I feel inclined to give AA some relief on this issue, actually, I was ready to only see SWA as the single US airline to engage in corporate charity, so this is still a surprise. AA does make it available directly through the website to donate your miles to a number of affiliated charities. This is not the case with SWA. With Rapid Rewards you have to do the leg work; It is just like you are giving the ticket to a friend. SWA does none of the work for you except during Katrina through the Red Cross, but it is not a permanent deal.

I have looked at this pretty close and I think I'm right. But it does not feel like it could be right. Honestly, SWA has got to be the number one benevolent airline company in the US...Right? If you are not, something is wrong. Low fares are not charity.

If I'm shown to be wrong on this delicate issue, I will crawl (figuratively speaking) to the SWA people on here with the humblest of apologies.

In the mean time, if you want to stop pi$$ing me off, every SWA employee can stop talking about horrible world events like it is just some business phenomenon (chase, 3+ times in this thread). Your 100th year of profitability will not be as significant as the day AA can restore their own profitability and recall every furloughed employee.

Happy Holidays.

 

[scoreboard]

I have looked at this pretty close and I think I'm right. If I'm shown to be wrong on this delicate issue, I will crawl (figuratively speaking) to the SWA people on here with the humblest of apologies.

Happy Holidays.

So what proof of charitabiltiy are you looking for, a webpage? Canceled checks, photos, what? Maybe your just not looking in the right place, maybe we just don't advertise enough. Again, just cause it's not bannered on our website doesn't mean we are not hugely charitable. Come on, cheap fares sure, now we are being judged by your moral standard for charity? My paycheck has five deductions on it for differing charitable entities. I, as are a significant percentage of our pilot force, am an Adopt-A-Pilot (education to 4-5 grade). Again, you didn't answer the question, WHAT DO YOU DO?

 

[Flopgut]

The truth about how LCC is bad for our country: This country needs to lead in all things aerospace, worldwide. We won't do that with just SWA as a national carrier. Secondly, I stand behind the example I have used as comparison with Alaska. SWA would like nothing more than to assimilate all lucrative routes flown by Alaska in the Pacific NW. SWA would have no intention of taking on the important flying the airline does in Western Alaska and service into bush villiages. Important flying into a very expensive, but necessary, environment would be lost. Project that onto the rest of the US and walla: We're a third world country with a less capable airline system than Aeroflot. Thirdly, if this charity business is at all fact then, obviously, getting rid of an airline like DAL in favor of SWA is not a good thing.

You don't like what I'm saying and I don't like saying it. Just consider this a professional correction to behavior that you need to change. SWA folks need to stop portraying the most despicable of world events like it is just business as usual. Sure it has revealed SWA to have certain advantages, just cool it with the "Yeah baby" stuff. The manner in which these changes have been occasioned is not indicative of a normal business cycle. I'm sorry, but you can't take the normal satisfaction in your company's triumph that you could if our industy's recent history were anything normal. Take the money, accept your victories, but do so with a little more tact. Lets all take a little personal inventory this holiday season and see if we can start some more positive dialog on here.

 

[firstthird]

Charity, here is a link to the SWA record.
http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/share_the_spirit/share_the_spirit.html
Frankly, it isn't that much. Biggest one is $7 million for Ronald Mcdonald Houses. And that is over 19 years.

Look at the first award though.

100 Best Corporate Citizens, 2000 to 2005, awarded by Business Ethics for service to seven stakeholder groups.

I think that sums it up. SWA is a corporation that exists to make a profit. Our duty is to our shareholders and employees, in that order. We discharge that duty by being fair to our customers and offering flights for reasonable prices. That is what we do, nice and simple.

We are not here to "save the profession," or to ensure that
"this country leads in all things aerospace, worldwide." We are here to sell seat miles at a low price. I know you've heard the slogan, "DING! You are free to move about the country." That is what we do. And, I for one, am proud that we seem to do it well. I know that we don't serve everywhere and don't go international. Other people do, glad that they do it. We, however, don't.

About the charity. It is great that Delta does contribute part of their corporate profits to charity. Although, if I was a stockholder, I'd rather they paid me some dividends and then I could contribute to the charities I prefer. Corporate charity giving is out of control in this country. Corporations should be worrying about making a profit, let their stockholders and employees to the contributing. The earlier comment about Microsoft was illustrative. Most of that giving is not in fact from Microsoft but from Bill and Melinda Gates, individuals and shareholders. They are giving out of their PERSONAL fortune. Good for them.

Short version. Companies exist to make a profit. Let their employees and stockholders do the charitable giving.

And frankly, one pension dump off on the PGBC wipes out a whole lot of corporate giving. The taxpayers that end up funding the pensions that are no longer funded might have preferred that the subject corporations had not done charitable giving and instead had funded their pensions.

Reminds me of a little joke about how the younger generation always sets out to clean up the world. The older generation tells them to clean up their room first.

 

[Flopgut]

So what proof of charitabiltiy are you looking for, a webpage? Canceled checks, photos, what? Maybe your just not looking in the right place, maybe we just don't advertise enough. Again, just cause it's not bannered on our website doesn't mean we are not hugely charitable. Come on, cheap fares sure, now we are being judged by your moral standard for charity? My paycheck has five deductions on it for differing charitable entities. I, as are a significant percentage of our pilot force, am an Adopt-A-Pilot (education to 4-5 grade). Again, you didn't answer the question, WHAT DO YOU DO?

I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You do more than me. I usually find one particular charity this time of year and give what I can. I give more routinely to my church. I used to do more. I have to act with financial caution now because my job may go away.

 

[enigma]

What is the purpose of charity? To help people maybe?

Who is being more charitable, a company that allows the average American to move about the country, or a company who screws it's shareholders and customers in order to make money so that it can then puff itself up by giving some money away?

For that matter, I believe corporate charity to be dishonest in all cases. If a corporation is giving anything away, I consider that to be proof positive that the corporation is stealing from it's shareholders.

 

[sf260pilot]

Companies just like individuals get tax benefits of being charitable. Would you rather write a check to the IRS for $5000, or give a charity of your choosing part of the monies and write a smaller check to Uncle Sam?

 

[Flopgut]

What is the purpose of charity? To help people maybe?

Who is being more charitable, a company that allows the average American to move about the country, or a company who screws it's shareholders and customers in order to make money so that it can then puff itself up by giving some money away?

For that matter, I believe corporate charity to be dishonest in all cases. If a corporation is giving anything away, I consider that to be proof positive that the corporation is stealing from it's shareholders.

A morbidly confused, fascist perspective if I ever saw one.

In this country, for IRS purposes, corporations are treated just like individuals. Individuals AND corporations can/should give to charity. It helps people and it saves you money. So, quite the opposite is true. If your company is NOT giving meaningfully to charity you can be sure that even as an employee or a shareholder, you are both wasting money and being greedy at the same time, which is stupid.

 

[scoreboard]

Hypocrit

A morbidly confused, fascist perspective if I ever saw one.

In this country, for IRS purposes, corporations are treated just like individuals. Individuals AND corporations can/should give to charity. It helps people and it saves you money. So, quite the opposite is true. If your company is NOT giving meaningfully to charity you can be sure that even as an employee or a shareholder, you are both wasting money and being greedy at the same time, which is stupid.

First, good for you on your charity. I didn't mean to make it personel, but it does begin at home.

How does paying more for a product so a corporation can give to charity saving me or anyone money?

And like you said, it's tax deductable, so there is a strong reason to give, and as posted, how is dropping an entire generations worth of retirement obligations on the Feds, while giving a fraction back, really charity, how is that?

 

[scoreboard]

Charity, here is a link to the SWA record.
http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/share_the_spirit/share_the_spirit.html
Frankly, it isn't that much. Biggest one is $7 million for Ronald Mcdonald Houses. And that is over 19 years.

But my point to Flop is we give the intangable, time and effort. It's easy to give money to get a deduction. No, I am not saying other airlines don't do that.

 

[Flopgut]

Scoreboard: The main thing I think we could note here is: Wow! Can you believe an airline is even on the list? And then get re-inspired on what we can each do this year. I think the statistic on Dallas' lack of corporate benevolence and the fact that the airline that gave the most to charity was not the one that made the most money is surprising. I think SWA might have a lot to gain for the brand if they led the way for the community and the industry on this. Just a thought. Also, it is a foregone conclusion that DAL won't be on that list for long. That is going to be hard on some folks.

With regard to pensions. The companies that are defaulting paid a lot of money to the PBGC to act as the backstop in this exact event. You and I pay disability. If I need it, I expect them to pay up and not fuss about it. The PBGC/Govt/taxpayers can get their checkbook out and pay up! In the wake of an enormously tragic event they could not have made the airline business a lower priority. A cursory amount of federal loan guarantees promised were actually given. The federal fuel tax should have been repealed immediately when oil hit $50 dollars per barrel. And, as of about two hours ago, it looks like pension legislation might get vetoed. What are these companies supposed to do? Especially when you examine this from a global perspective. Open skies and foreign ownership are now in the pipeline so it looks like this country wants to be out of the airline business entirely. When we have to compete for a job with an EU pilot group we're likely to lose out just on the fact that they have universal health care. Even if we're cheaper they will probably opt to grow the other group to aviod the hassle. So if they are going to throw me in the dumpster, they can pick up the check. They are only paying a fraction of what they owe anyway.

Now, this boils down to individuals. I very much subscribe to the JCPenney byline you have on your screen. The only thing we can do at the legacy airlines is try and do outstanding work. And we are. Legacy pilots work in "coal mine" conditions compared to you SWA folks. These hours we work, places we fly, equipment we operate compound the effort this job requires 10 times what you folks do. You "work hard and play hard", we work hard--then we work some more! When we get a break and want to get caught up on some news (which is never good) we get the "Yeah baby, SWA is the greatest!" stuck in our face. When I inventory the terms of my career's demise I respectfully request that you acknowledge that factors other than a $79 dollar round trip to Tampa were included in the hardware trained on me. Because if that was all I had to deal with, this would be easy.

 

[N7167L]

Flop -
Your views on charity are totally foreign to me/my thinking. I personally know SWA has performed many, many hours of community service, all under the radar - which is the best way to perform such labors. (not make some hollow "list")

And quickly, your pension comments are insane! If "XYZ" Airline(s) screwed up and can not properly fund their pension(s)... then it's THEIR problem; not mine! (the taxpayer's) Let's have some accountability here.

 

[scoreboard]

Feel your pain

Scoreboard: The main thing I think we could note here is: Wow! Can you believe an airline is even on the list? And then get re-inspired on what we can each do this year. I think the statistic on Dallas' lack of corporate benevolence and the fact that the airline that gave the most to charity was not the one that made the most money is surprising. I think SWA might have a lot to gain for the brand if they led the way for the community and the industry on this. Just a thought. Also, it is a foregone conclusion that DAL won't be on that list for long. That is going to be hard on some folks.

With regard to pensions. The companies that are defaulting paid a lot of money to the PBGC to act as the backstop in this exact event. You and I pay disability. If I need it, I expect them to pay up and not fuss about it. The PBGC/Govt/taxpayers can get their checkbook out and pay up! In the wake of an enormously tragic event they could not have made the airline business a lower priority. A cursory amount of federal loan guarantees promised were actually given. The federal fuel tax should have been repealed immediately when oil hit $50 dollars per barrel. And, as of about two hours ago, it looks like pension legislation might get vetoed. What are these companies supposed to do? Especially when you examine this from a global perspective. Open skies and foreign ownership are now in the pipeline so it looks like this country wants to be out of the airline business entirely. When we have to compete for a job with an EU pilot group we're likely to lose out just on the fact that they have universal health care. Even if we're cheaper they will probably opt to grow the other group to aviod the hassle. So if they are going to throw me in the dumpster, they can pick up the check. They are only paying a fraction of what they owe anyway.

Now, this boils down to individuals. I very much subscribe to the JCPenney byline you have on your screen. The only thing we can do at the legacy airlines is try and do outstanding work. And we are. Legacy pilots work in "coal mine" conditions compared to you SWA folks. These hours we work, places we fly, equipment we operate compound the effort this job requires 10 times what you folks do. You "work hard and play hard", we work hard--then we work some more! When we get a break and want to get caught up on some news (which is never good) we get the "Yeah baby, SWA is the greatest!" stuck in our face. When I inventory the terms of my career's demise I respectfully request that you acknowledge that factors other than a $79 dollar round trip to Tampa were included in the hardware trained on me. Because if that was all I had to deal with, this would be easy.

Flopgut, I feel your pain and sympathize.

I think we can say we agree to disagree wrt PBGC. I would argue that if a company is dropping it's pension, it needs to reform itself so as to at least pay for the deficit it will cause, then cancel future pension plans, or at least, and now the hard part, liquidate to pay for its obligations. Because in the end, "I'm" paying for the legacy pensions, ironic. Yes, all the drivel about PBGC is there for blah blah, but really, did the companies whom are defaulting, do their charitable part and fund as "appropriate", not just the legal minimum? Points to ponder over a beer.

Not sure about the fuel tax, how would the airports be funded?

Foriegn ownership is a problem, maybe another topic on how to compete against that. I also agree this industry ain't what it used to be. I take your point of view and aknowledge other factors have been at play, some may blow the SWA banner a little loudly, but usually in defence of and not to start a fight.

Best of Holidays to you and yours, really.

 

[enigma]

A morbidly confused, fascist perspective if I ever saw one.

In this country, for IRS purposes, corporations are treated just like individuals. Individuals AND corporations can/should give to charity. It helps people and it saves you money. So, quite the opposite is true. If your company is NOT giving meaningfully to charity you can be sure that even as an employee or a shareholder, you are both wasting money and being greedy at the same time, which is stupid.

This only proves that tax laws are screwed up.

 

[Flopgut]

Flopgut, I feel your pain and sympathize.

I think we can say we agree to disagree wrt PBGC. I would argue that if a company is dropping it's pension, it needs to reform itself so as to at least pay for the deficit it will cause, then cancel future pension plans, or at least, and now the hard part, liquidate to pay for its obligations. Because in the end, "I'm" paying for the legacy pensions, ironic. Yes, all the drivel about PBGC is there for blah blah, but really, did the companies whom are defaulting, do their charitable part and fund as "appropriate", not just the legal minimum? Points to ponder over a beer.

Not sure about the fuel tax, how would the airports be funded?

Foriegn ownership is a problem, maybe another topic on how to compete against that. I also agree this industry ain't what it used to be. I take your point of view and aknowledge other factors have been at play, some may blow the SWA banner a little loudly, but usually in defence of and not to start a fight.

Best of Holidays to you and yours, really.

I have been gone for a while and could not reply. Thanks for being real tolerant of my rant and being quite decent. I come off like an a$$hole on here and I'm sorry. I'm no different in person.

When I say I hope each SWA pilot has a great career I mean it. I would not wish this uncertainty and doubt on anyone. I would tell you how to avoid it if I knew how for sure. Just keep in mind that, for the most part, every legacy pilot also thought the answer was superior effort and it did not necessarily work. Or at least every legacy pilot thought that effort and productivity could be a backstop to a perished career and that may not be enough.

I'm going to aspire to a "less a$$hole" standard on here in the New Year. And if I can't accomplish that I'm going to leave. I need to stop griping about SWA.

I'm going to watch this thread because I have a suspicion that Chase might be compiling data detailing SWA's charitable activities that would smite my initial post and require my apology. I'll go ahead and give it now: Please forgive my frustration filled rant in this thread. If the whole truth were magically revealed on the subject of charity and citizenship in this airline community I'm sure I would be a distant second to an overwhelming majority of SWA folks. I apologize.

Have a Merry Christamas and a great New Year.

 

[chase]

Flopgut,

Not compiling stats..to busy with other things. Trying to compare companies benevolence level is probably doable for those with more free time....I'm sure DAL & others have contributed what they feel is reasonable in light of their current situation. The 700+ pilots who donate time to the Adopt-a-pilot to teach 5th graders to the thousands of free tickets SWA gives out each year for various causes...I'm sure DAL & others have equally benevolent programs.....I won't even argue that one airlines "gifts" are better than another....they aren't.

What is nice though is to work for a company that has the means to do it & does it across the board, not just to outside communities but to our own, i.e. Hurricane Katrina victims who have receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from fellow employees. I hope things work out well for you & your airline and that continued gift giving can occur to those who need it more than you or I....cheers....and your personality is fine by me...no need to change anything in my view.