Now, why would the Process Agreement be worded in such a way that "all deals are off" if a NEGOTIATED settlement is not reached? Why?
It's not written that way.
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.
Now, why would the Process Agreement be worded in such a way that "all deals are off" if a NEGOTIATED settlement is not reached? Why?
Good lord, we must be getting close to something. The bickering is getting more focused.
It's not written that way.
In arbitration, past precedent in other arbitration decisions is not binding on future arbitrators, but pretty much every arbitrator still uses it as a guide, because arbitrators don't like to be innovators.
I'm not so sure about your logic PCL. And apparently, neither is your Merger Committee. An ATN buddy of mine sent me your MC update from the last day or so.
It seems the ATN Merger Committee is starting to 'see the light' with respect to the inherent risks in arbitration. PCL clearly disagrees. Maybe that is the source of his 'difference of opinion' with the MC that led to his recall by the MEC. Perhaps the MEC can 'see the light' as well.
From the ATN ALPA Merger Committee Update:
That means arbitrators aren’t bound by examples of other recent cases, and are instead free to shape an award that best fits the unique circumstances of that particular merger. As arbitrator George Nicolau said in his 1990 ISL award in the FedEx-Flying Tigers merger:
“There are four basic lessons to be learned…; Each case turns on its own facts; that the objective is to make the integration fair and equitable; that the proposals advanced by those in contest rarely meet that standard; and that the end result, no matter how crafted, never commands universal acceptance.”
And another thing PCL, despite this thinking, I do believe Nicolau was hired again for other SLI cases.
In 1985, Southwest Airlines bought out Muse Air, making it a subsidiary company, and renaming it to TranStar Airlines. Attempts were made to integrate the Transtar pilots with Southwest Airlines pilots, but in a classic example of misapplied BATNA an integrated seniority list was rejected by the Transtar pilot's association. At its peak, TranStar employed some 900 people and served 14 cities, but by mid 1987 the company was still not making a profit, and operations were ceased.
I'm just saying....................................
In 1985, Southwest Airlines bought out Muse Air, making it a subsidiary company, and renaming it to TranStar Airlines. Attempts were made to integrate the Transtar pilots with Southwest Airlines pilots, but in a classic example of misapplied BATNA an integrated seniority list was rejected by the Transtar pilot's association. At its peak, TranStar employed some 900 people and served 14 cities, but by mid 1987 the company was still not making a profit, and operations were ceased.
I'm just saying....................................
No, not true, SWA considers Airtran inferior, not the pilots, you guys are held in high esteem, don't mix the two even though you work there.
Lets be real on the 717/500 discussion, a 717 is an RJ with RJ range. Our 500 can go coast to coast with gas for a CATIII. AT corporate documents state the 717 is a short haul high frequency regional jet. There is a difference, but it's in the companies, not the pilots.
What are SWA pilots afraid of? Not "not getting something", they are afraid of losing what they have. Period. Let me be clear, if you threaten that, what we have, you will be gone.
Guadaloupe holdings was created for a reason..............
Yes it is. Talk to your Merger Committee.
I think GK wants Atlanta. And slots on the east coast. He's not in a hurry to bring what some may see as a lot of malcontented unappreciative employees into his fold. I'm sure he knew that AAI was ready to strike before his acquisition decision. So he risks what has always been considered SWA's greatest asset it's culture, in bringing on these employees. But he can't just refuse to bring them over without a rational argument. So he lets this thing go to arbitration, as per the process agreement. Which no one likes. Then to avoid a America West-USAIR debacle, he decides to operate Air Tran separately. Or do something drastic with them. The problem here is GK has Mr. Kelleher, and Ms Barrett looking over his shoulder. Two people who hold no real power but retain a lot of influence, and helped build the company GK runs. I think SWA really does value it's culture. Mr. Kelleher's actions relative to Muse Air are legend. Now Mr. Kelly has to establish himself. He sort of started that with Frontier. Everyone seems to think after the SLI, the battle is over. In fact it may just be starting. One may
win the battle and lose the war. GK may feel the need to set a precedent for any future airline it purchases, and Air Tran may be the vehicle it uses to do so. For Air Tran this is gonna be tricky. How much to push for without incurring the wrath of GK. Push to little and possibly give up some seniority. Push to much and possibly lose everything. This is gonna be interesting.
For Air Tran this is gonna be tricky. How much to push for without incurring the wrath of GK. Push to little and possibly give up some seniority. Push to much and possibly lose everything. This is gonna be interesting.
From the ATN ALPA Merger Committee Update:
That means arbitrators aren’t bound by examples of other recent cases, and are instead free to shape an award that best fits the unique circumstances of that particular merger. As arbitrator George Nicolau said in his 1990 ISL award in the FedEx-Flying Tigers merger:
“There are four basic lessons to be learned…; Each case turns on its own facts; that the objective is to make the integration fair and equitable; that the proposals advanced by those in contest rarely meet that standard; and that the end result, no matter how crafted, never commands universal acceptance.”
Even though THE REST OF THE WORLD sees two similar airlines flying similar equipment in a similar market structure.
... Even though the flying we do in the EXACT SAME AIRCRAFT (or one that's even more advanced and automated with a seating capacity the same as one of the smaller 737's) is actually the same or more involved than what SWA does on a daily basis. I find it somewhat amusing, actually, in a sad sort of way.
around $60k a year per pilot
Just a little dose of reality
have a great Father's Day weekend out there.
True statement.This really is gonna be the most interesting angle to watch play out.
You're not reading it in its ENTIRETY. Here it is in its ENTIRETY so you can understand the full context in how the Process Agreement can be canceled (it can't now unless ALL FOUR PARTIES agree to cancel it):PCL,
I understand the agreement perfectly, appearently you do not. Re-read Section VII, in particular part (b). 15 days notice is all that is required by any party to walk away from it. Why was it written that way? I think you might be delusional if you think you can box Gary into a bad merger. Continue at your own peril on that one.
The merger agreement was the actual purchase of AirTran. That was never terminated (and can't be terminated after the fact), so this clause becomes null and void. The only clause still in effect in this regard is VII (a), requiring all FOUR parties to agree to its termination.VII (b) Any party may terminate this agreement by fifteen (15) days written advance notice delivered to all parties at any time FOLLOWING THE TERMINATION OF THE MERGER AGREEMENT.