Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Any ex-Morris Air guys out there?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
A

aa73

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Posts
2,075
How did everything work out with the merger with SWA? Goodness or bitterness? Since both of you were non-ALPA, which way did the integration go?

I am researching the outcomes of past mergers/acquisitions between non-ALPA airlines after we saw what happened with the AA-TWA screw job. I'd also like to know any details of the integration of the Pan Am Airbus pilots into DL back in '91, since both of them were ALPA.

Thanks,
73
 
Integration?

There was no integration..there was a staple job with morris pilots having the same date of hire and save pay..they stayed on their pay till it caught up with swa pay scales. All in all, I think it was a good deal for the morris air pilots...

JMO

Aviator 7576
 
There was extreme bitterness at the time. Once they realized they would be SWA captains very soon, the dissent quieted.

SWA even gave former SWA people who'd been fired a chance to redeem themselves.

If SWA had been stagnant like most carriers are now, this would have been a contentious merger.

Delta/PanAm didn't generate a lot of bad feeling from those who were integrated because most weren't on the property very long. The seats in the A310's went very senior in the months leading up to the acquisition (there was a mad scramble in the training center to get on that airplane) and not that many 727 crews went to Delta.

I believe those who went over got 1 year credit for 11 served and it took several years to reach pay parity (THAT didn't happen at AA!). If anyone has any better info, please post it. This is all from memory from a PAA guy who was going with the planes.TC
 
http://www.southwest.com/images/photo_gallery/morris.jpg

We had a couple guys sue to get DOH. Someone else will correct me if I'm wrong but I think the senior pilot on property only had a couple years seniority before WN bought them. I'd venture a guess that almost 13 years now at WN, they're pretty happy with the outcome.

WN didn't even know the pacific northwest existed before Morris Air.

Gup
 
Thanks for the details. I guess the outcome of a merger/acquisition depends a lot on the current economy as well as the financial condition of the combined airline. Unfortunately, these two factors were severely lacking during our infamous merger...

thanks again,
73
 
They are all at SWA. At first NONE were coming over. SWAPA went to bat for the Pilots of Morris and convinced the Company to bring them over. Some were pissed, most were smart enough to see a good deal. Some tried to sue the company. Herb said never again, will we buy anybody, to much of a headache. Times have changed, Gary Kelly stated buying ATA was soon off the table since they were a unionized carrier. If ATA didn't have ALPA, they might all be at SWA, now. That might be a good thing for some?
 
SWA/FO said:
They are all at SWA. At first NONE were coming over. SWAPA went to bat for the Pilots of Morris and convinced the Company to bring them over. Some were pissed, most were smart enough to see a good deal. Some tried to sue the company. Herb said never again, will we buy anybody, to much of a headache. Times have changed, Gary Kelly stated buying ATA was soon off the table since they were a unionized carrier. If ATA didn't have ALPA, they might all be at SWA, now. That might be a good thing for some?
Click to expand...

I've never heard that before. I've heard many other things, but never that. I believe SWA never had any intentions of buying ATA, ever. They wanted to control MDW without paying for it. They got what they wanted, in spades.
 
So, do you guys think that a staple job is OK as long as the newly arrived pilots upgrade wthin a reasonable time? Or is a staple job just flat out wrong?
 
Depends if the staple job is below or above you. I'd say with Southwest...once you get here, you find out how easy it is to get a good working schedule. Some of the most junior guys fly some nice paying trips. Also, the Morris guys got pay raises or were pay protected, that helps a bit.

HalinTeaxs,

I think it was in a video of Gary Kelly that they showed to us in EPT (training). He said something to the effect that buying ATA outright was off the table fairly quickly.. because Aircraft types and Unionized work force was mentioned after that. They was going to be a trade with some or all of ATA's -800 for some of Alaska's -700...but that fell through.
 
Staple is ok if you're the stapler - not OK if you're the paper.

Hal, my brother, we certainly "paid" for MDW. You were selling and we were buying. Plain and simple. We didn't pry it out of your hands. I will say I think it's the best business move since buying Morris.

Gup
 
aa73 said:
So, do you guys think that a staple job is OK as long as the newly arrived pilots upgrade wthin a reasonable time? Or is a staple job just flat out wrong?
Click to expand...
ALPA Merger policy:
integration until a fair and equitable agreement is reached, keeping in mind the following goals, in no particular order:
a. Preserve jobs.
b. Avoid windfalls to either group at the expense of the other.
c. Maintain or improve pre-merger pay and standard of living.
d. Maintain or improve pre-merger pilot status.
e. Minimize detrimental changes to career expectations.

A staple job could, in fact, meet some of those objectives, but never all of them. Same goes for DOH, IMHO.
 
Dangerkitty said:
ATA would be out of business if SWA had not stepped in. The employees of ATA owe their jobs to SWA.
Click to expand...
No, the ATA employees owe SWA nothing. SWA is a business not a charity. Where do people get the idea that pilots need to thank the pilots of another airline because of their employer's actions?
 
TWA Dude said:
No, the ATA employees owe SWA nothing. SWA is a business not a charity. Where do people get the idea that pilots need to thank the pilots of another airline because of their employer's actions?
Click to expand...

I never stated that the pilots of ATA need to thank the SWA for anything. Where you got that is beyond me.

However, SWA gave ATA the liquidity it needed to maintain operations. Without that much needed cash ATA would have shut down.

Understand?
 
Dangerkitty said:
I never stated that the pilots of ATA need to thank the SWA for anything. Where you got that is beyond me.
Click to expand...
You wrote, "The employees of ATA owe their jobs to SWA." I stand by my interpretation. As you recall, Air Tran and America West also had some intentions on ATA and/or its assets. SWA outbid the others. Do the pilots of ATA "owe" them for almost saving their jobs?
 
Three things.

One, it basically cost SWA nothing to get the MDW operation when all was said and done. SWA got their money back, and then some, for what they "loaned" ATA. SWA is still reaping the profits of this transaction via the codeshare.

Two, unionized workforces are everywhere. SWA has one. In fact, SWA is more unionized than ATA ever was. It was just that GK didn't want to cut a deal. Didn't have to, really.

Three, Airtran and AWA were at the table first. SWA just outbid one, and the other withdrew it's offer for a variety of reasons. Rather suspicious reasons, at that. ATA would probably still be in business, regardless. Will still have a lucrative military operation which has saved our a$$es more than once. Granted, we would be smaller than we are now if the Airtran deal went through, but we'd still be around, not me though. I would have been gone a year ago. AWA and ATA pilot and FA groups had already come to terms with and integration plan if that deal had gone through. You are correct in one aspect, our MEC chair at the time was not of the mind to accept a staple job, and I don't think the FA's would have either.
 
TWA/AWA Dude,

Correct on the ALPA merger policy. My intent in opening this thread was to try and determine what the proper way is to integrate one or two pilot groups that are NOT ALPA. The SWA/Morris deal was one I wanted to know about... and obviously there is ours, which most definitely did not work out.

Morris got stapled and yet they are really not complaining.... whereas a lot of our guys got stapled and it's ugly. Obviously, the mitigating factor is, as I pointed out above, the state of the economy and/or the financial health of the new airline (i.e. no furloughs.)

Thanks to all who helped calrify.
73
 
aa73--Clearly, the AA/TWA integration would have gone better had AMR not downsized dramatically. (DUH!) Would I be complaining if I were still a line-holding S80 CA flying with TWAdude? Nope. (Yes, many would be complaining because they had to commute from the coasts to the fence in STL. But it would be minor compared to the anger and suffering caused by being out of work.)

I think that you can conclude that the success of any integration depends on the growth of the surviving carrier afterward. (Keep in mind that there are some AA guys who are still angry about the AirCal guys going ahead of them. That's a little hard to swallow given the circumstances of some of my friends.) TC
 
aa73 said:
My intent in opening this thread was to try and determine what the proper way is to integrate one or two pilot groups that are NOT ALPA.
Click to expand...
Well, the problem is that future mergers are bound to be with one side under duress. ALPA Merger policy automatically gives both groups a fair chance in front of the aribitrator. The dominant carrier in a non-ALPA-to-ALPA merger will likely follow in the footsteps of the APA/APFA and just do whatever the heck they please (and then brag about how "fair" they are). So while well-intentioned your question is moot. Business is business.
 
717 and TWAdude,

I agree with both of your opinions. From my point of view, I think it would be neat to see - in a future merger - a non-ALPA pilot group insist on neutral arbitration. This would have been my solution with the AA-TWA deal, of course it was severely rebuffed and laughed off by a lot of my coworkers. IMHO, neutral arbitration is the only fair way.

HOWEVER, do you folks think that SW-Morris should have gone to an arbitrator? How about AA-Reno? These were very small carriers that had only been around for a few years and had a couple hundred pilots. Would an arbitrator be a waste of time in those situations?

Thanks,
73
 
73--I believe all mergers should go before a neutral arbitrator simply to establish, then preserve the status quo for integrations. Reno and Morris might have gotten a little better deal (doubtful) but it would have mitigated much of the bad feeling between the groups.TC
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom