ATN ALPA Recalls Move Forward

[Fubijaakr]

Bubba,
You are clueless on the finance structure of ALPA. The more you post the more ignorant you appear. For you and everyone like you that believes ALPA national is the power and everyone else is just puppets, you are wholly incorrect. Airtran pilots make the decisions for airtran pilots. ALPA national just maintains the professionals that give advice legal and accounting.

Thank you. You are correct, Sir.

 

[GuppyWN]

This message is hidden because Fubijaakr is on your ignore list.

Who farted?

Gup

 

[flynvixen]

Amateur hour, again.

Sure do wish we had a management lap dog, like SWAPA has GK. Apparently he fights the battles for them.

It only matters that we win not you......dont forget the company runs the company not the greedy unions......look what ALPA has done to your JV airline as well as the rest of the industry IE.....United, et al

 

[madjack]

FV,

Rudely put, but nonetheless factual:

"dont forget the company runs the company not the greedy unions......look what ALPA has done to your JV airline as well as the rest of the industry IE.....United, et al"


The AAI pilots lost hundreds of millions of dollars due to the greed of 7 MEC members and a couple hundred vocal pilots...I predict SWA will be forgiven by AAI pilots but the silent majority will harbor ill will towards their MEC members and those vocal pilots that shot the first deal down...

 

[bravodude]

That's exactly right. This is a waste of time and money. We're going to drop $10,000 for a vote that very well might fail to recall anybody, and if it is successful, the only thing we've accomplished is create an MEC that is nearly half vacant for a month and half during some very busy times. And then, after new elections, we'll have three brand new reps who have probably never done any union work before, and won't have a clue what they're doing.

But this is AirTran. We don't do union stability. We do infighting. As much as I'm an ALPA supporter, I actually look forward to SWAPA membership. It's not about the union, it's about the pilot group. You guys have a very unified and organized pilot group, and SWAPA is successful as a result. Our pilots will do well to see how a truly unified group can make things work.



No, ALPA National didn't give any advice one way or the other on the first deal. They merely gave the pros and cons and let the reps decide. That's how ALPA works. It isn't big brother telling you how to handle your local business.

Who the f are u and what did you do with the real PCL-128. You have never wanted to work at SWAPA and even went so far as to make a statement that if we ever merged you would Quit. Well I guess so much for been a women of your word!

 

[scoreboardII]

bravodude, it's part of the assimilation into the Borg, let it go man.

 

[OldManPilot]

Isn't the gloating a bit over the top?

 

[Fubijaakr]

Isn't the gloating a bit over the top?

Better get used to it. What did you expect from these guys?

 

[c9skytrain]

I was at the meeting on Friday. Before the meeting, I would not have known C if I had run over his perfectly moussed head. IMO, he basically admitted he had a huge chip on his shoulder from when ATA was acquired by SWA and the treatment they received.

I felt he used his position in the union to carry out a personal vendetta and he used our pilot group to do it. The other two, J and H were as Stalin would say, "useful idiots". I actually voted to keep H. J. on the other hand, needs turn by turn voice commands by gps to walk from the living room to the bathroom.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Bubba,
You are clueless on the finance structure of ALPA. The more you post the more ignorant you appear. For you and everyone like you that believes ALPA national is the power and everyone else is just puppets, you are wholly incorrect. Airtran pilots make the decisions for airtran pilots. ALPA national just maintains the professionals that give advice legal and accounting.

You said, "the more you post" [about] "the finance structure of ALPA." Hmmm.. Let's see... the most recent post you quoted makes a total of uh... exactly ONE post I've made about ALPA's finances. Plus I posted a list of bullet points on a different thread, that I clearly listed as someone else's work. Did ALPA not teach you to count above one?

Okay, suppose you tell us how ALPA finances work. What I said was what other ALPA people have told me it works (you know, ones that aren't currently SWA-haters). Do you not send your dues to national? Do they then not provide you with capital to pay for operations? How's it REALLY work? Do you keep your money in-house (like SWAPA), but then occasionally send off a voluntary charitable donation to national? I'm assuming someone has to cover Capt Moak's salary and benefits, plus the cost of running the national show. Please enlighten us.

If how other ALPA pilots describe the finances to me is wrong, then fine. Don't spend any money, don't actually do anything with your union dues, don't try to get your money's worth. I don't actually care what your union does, although it is sometimes interesting and/or amusing to watch. I was trying to lighten up the mood. Like I said in my one post, it's your business (at least until the last AAI guy is absorbed and that particular chapter of ALPA ceases to provide dues to national, and winks out of existence in favor of SWAPA).

If you want to be pissed, then be pissed. That's on you, not me. It's gonna' make the rest of your career not much fun, and probably raise your blood pressure. From the tone of your post, somehow I don't think you're really "Full of Luv." Must be some of that sarcasm stuff...

Bubba

PS Maybe it's time for another thread debating the merits of ALPA vs an in-house union. Or then again, maybe not....

 

[SWA Bubba]

Thank you. You are correct, Sir.

Good one, Potsie.

Since people keep pushing you to explain your reasonings (and you can't), you seem to now be reduced to glad-handing and back-slapping any and every other SWA-hater who gets off a zinger. In this new light, you kinda' remind me of that cartoon where the big bulldog is going to fight some other animal, and this little chihuahua keeps running around in circles behind the bulldog shouting, "get 'em Spike! Get 'em!" In case you hadn't figured out, you're the chihuahua in this particular cartoon (but he WAS such a cute little thing!).

Bubba

 

[dh82dvr]

This message is hidden because flynvixen is on your ignore list.

much more peaceful.

:beer:

cheers more beers lads......

......and lasses

 

[On Your Six]

Voting AIP1 down at the MEC level, dumbest move in commercial aviation history....from a union leadership perspective...they should be ridden out of town on a rail...of course a few hundred vocal pilots had their ear too...just plain stupid...of course SWAPA could be just as stupid (the members not the leadership) and vote SL10 down...which would be the BEST case scenario for the AAI pilots going into arby...

Yeah but can you justify putting the bottom 60% of one company into the bottom 20% of a merged one? I don't think that would ever happen in arbitration, especially since neither airline was in BK. They thought the offer was bad (sounded like it), and they turned it down. QOL and seniority can be more important than pay, especially when pay can go away. Seniority really can't, unless the airline goes away.


Godspeed!


OYS

 

[On Your Six]

Isn't the gloating a bit over the top?

You didn't think this was going to happen?


Godspeed!


OYS

 

[Tripower455]

When you have a strong company that takes care of it's employees it's easy to have a unified pilot group.

Gup

I've found the opposite to be the truth.

Have we ever had a 98% vote on anything?

 

[madjack]

Yeah but can you justify putting the bottom 60% of one company into the bottom 20% of a merged one?

No but if the carrier is acquired than that changes things...especially if the mgmt wants a deal vs arbitration...

 

[Fubijaakr]

...but if the carrier is acquired than that changes things...especially if the mgmt wants a deal vs arbitration...

Again with the "Hired, not Acquired" argument. Tired. And wrong. But, whatever.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Again with the "Hired, not Acquired" argument. Tired. And wrong. But, whatever.

Fubi,

That wasn't exactly the argument he made, but I'm sure you knew that. Did you notice? He spokd of management wanting a deal. His point was not one of pilots quoting "hired, not acquired," but rather that management acquired Airtran, and then apparently management made a decision that giving AAI pilots what they wanted wasn't worth it to them (keep in mind that, unlike an ALPA carrier, SWA believes its relationship with its employees and its culture ARE important, and have a tangible benefit to the fiscal bottom line), weighing synergistic gains vs the cost of culture loss. I guess AAI ALPA found out what kind of price tag GK put on culture loss.

This may come as a surprise to you, Fubi (and probably OYS/GL and others), but pilot unions do not actually run any airline. ALPA may try to get people to believe it, but the reality is that pilot unions do not get to make the rules. ALPA (or any other union), can make its own internal rules and policies, and strut around quoting them, but at the end of the day, the people with the checkbooks get the final word. ALPA's rules and policies and ideas of "fairness" are only binding on those ALPA members who have agreed to be bound by them, and no one else, despite what YOU want or think.

Speaking of which, any objective person could tell you that the word "fairness" is on its face subjective, and in the eye of the beholder. ALPA's idea of fairness, I hate to tell you, is not universal. You seem to be under the impression that it is, and when someone disagrees, you don't even have any backing to offer, just invective.

Example: Why does 5 or 6 years' service at Airtran make a pilot more deserving of a SWA captainship than 10 years' service at Southwest? I dunno.... I suppose because ALPA says so. Hmmm... So sorry.

I guess if I disagree with ALPA, I'm a "sky nazi" (Lumberg) or a "buttf#cker" (Fubi). As it turns out, Southwest pilots have a different perspective on "fair," which is no less a valid opinion than ALPA's, other than it's apparently closer to the perspective on "fair" held by the only people that actually matter in this case, SWA management. You remember, the guys paying for all this.

I've noticed (actually, everyone's noticed) that you spout opinions on all this with absolutely no backing argument. Why? Do you even actually believe the stuff you write? Doesn't seem like it. You also like to use the term "red herring" to casually dismiss other people's opinions. I suggest you get a dictionary, because you don't seem to know what it means. Either that or you do know, but are intentionally using it incorrectly.

Bubba

 

[Fubijaakr]

Example: Why does 5 or 6 years' service at Airtran make a pilot more deserving of a SWA captainship than 10 years' service at Southwest? I dunno.... I suppose because ALPA says so. Hmmm... So sorry.

I'm sorry that you're so obtuse, but I'll explain it AGAIN...

1. No bump/no flush.
2. DoH

Sure, the guys holding AAI CA seats will continue to hold them AS LONG AS THEY STAY IN BASE.

If they voluntarily vacate their base, then the most senior SWA F/O could bid that CA seat.

They deserve to hold on to what they brought to the merger, nothing more. And they DON'T deserve to be stapled to the bottom of their list so YOU can upgrade.

Get it? Got it? Good.

That's fair. Holding a gun to their heads, threatening to downsize them out of their jobs is not fair.

BTW, ALPA doesn't recognize DoH in the merger/frag policy, so your anti-ALPA rant is misplaced. Since you hold a contrary opinion, that automatically makes you an ALPA hater, using SWA reasoning.

 

[On Your Six]

I'm sorry that you're so obtuse, but I'll explain it AGAIN...

1. No bump/no flush.
2. DoH

Sure, the guys holding AAI CA seats will continue to hold them AS LONG AS THEY STAY IN BASE.

If they voluntarily vacate their base, then the most senior SWA F/O could bid that CA seat.

They deserve to hold on to what they brought to the merger, nothing more. And they DON'T deserve to be stapled to the bottom of their list so YOU can upgrade.

Get it? Got it? Good.

That's fair. Holding a gun to their heads, threatening to downsize them out of their jobs is not fair.

BTW, ALPA doesn't recognize DoH in the merger/frag policy, so your anti-ALPA rant is misplaced. Since you hold a contrary opinion, that automatically makes you an ALPA hater, using SWA reasoning.

Well stated Fubi. These particular jackwagon Corndogs on FI have entitlement issues, and can't understand that GK decided this deal was good for SWA as a whole, yet these Cornies think only they and SWAPA should benefit.


Godspeed!



OYS

 

[texman]

Can't we just get along. Fupa stop the BS and OYS get a life bro!

 

[Fubijaakr]

Again, anything counter to SWA groupthink is BS. Its so sad its laughable.

 

[madjack]

anything counter to SWA groupthink is BS. Its so sad its laughable.

Well unless we go to arby your arguments do not matter...Mr Kelly had the right to intervene in the negotiations, and he has a responsibility to preserve the culture...the latest agreement is mgmts best effort to do this....an arbitrated list would probably look better for the AAI pilots but it is an unknown, and no one knows what Mr Kelly would do with the list...my guess is he would not integrate if AAI votes this deal down...could be wrong but I doubt it...is that unfair? what is in it for Mr Kelly (who came up with the proposed list)?

 

[Sacha]

Just out from Rueters...IATA...tough times ahead for airlines worldwide....frightening is the word described by Thai CEO......then throw in carbon extortion.....not good....

OYS/Genital......how many guys below you?.....Delta could be hit hard by this.....do you think you could get your second furlough notice?......

Don't worry.....just keep telling the Trannies to turn this POS down and go to arby.....Gary doesn't pay attention to this kind of stuff......after all, he is just a Bean Counter by training......

 

[SWA Bubba]

I'm sorry that you're so obtuse, but I'll explain it AGAIN...

1. No bump/no flush.
2. DoH

Sure, the guys holding AAI CA seats will continue to hold them AS LONG AS THEY STAY IN BASE.

If they voluntarily vacate their base, then the most senior SWA F/O could bid that CA seat.

They deserve to hold on to what they brought to the merger, nothing more. And they DON'T deserve to be stapled to the bottom of their list so YOU can upgrade.

Get it? Got it? Good.

That's fair. Holding a gun to their heads, threatening to downsize them out of their jobs is not fair.

BTW, ALPA doesn't recognize DoH in the merger/frag policy, so your anti-ALPA rant is misplaced. Since you hold a contrary opinion, that automatically makes you an ALPA hater, using SWA reasoning.

I really think you should actually read some of what you write. I get it: YOU think "fair" means DOH and no bump/flush. The fact of the matter is that everyone has a different definition of "fair," and yours doesn't matter any more than anyone else's. In fact, it matters less, since you're not involved. Some Airtran people think relative seniority is the only definition of fair. That's WAY better for Airtran than your definition. Right? Some Southwest people think stapling is fair. That's WAY worse for Airtran than your definition. Still Right? What some people (including me) think is "fair" is that Airtran pilots give up some seniority in exchange for our hard-fought, industry leading contract. That's somewhere in the middle, isn't it? Regardless of the smug, invective-filled answer you're liable to give to that question, as it turns out, it was closer to the only definition of "fair" that actually mattered--that of management.

Here's what you said:

They deserve to hold on to what they brought to the merger, nothing more. And they DON'T deserve to be stapled to the bottom of their list so YOU can upgrade.
​

1. If you really believe they should hold on to what they brought and "nothing more," than it looks like you're arguing that they should keep their contract and pay (it's what they brought, smart guy) in return for keeping their seats and seniority. Is that what you meant? If they're getting "more" (our contract instead of theirs), then they're ahead of where they started and SWA pilots aren't. Is that "fair" in Fubi-world?

2. They're not being stapled so I can upgrade. I upgraded in late 2007. In fact, they're not being stapled at all. They're being feathered in with an average loss of seniority of approx 2-1/2 years. It appears that difference is lost on you. But then again, you have a bad habit of grossly exaggerating, to try highlight your point. I guess no one would see it otherwise.

Finally, as far as being a hater goes, now I KNOW you don't actually read what you type, seeing as how you've turned it around again. One more time for the Fubi-cized of the world: You have an opinion. I have a different opinion. That, on itself does not make anyone a hater. However, I stated that my opinion was different than yours in a civil manner, and in turn you called me a "buttf#cker" for doing so. That indeed DOES make you a hater. Got it? See the difference? Everyone else does.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Well stated Fubi. These particular jackwagon Corndogs on FI have entitlement issues, and can't understand that GK decided this deal was good for SWA as a whole, yet these Cornies think only they and SWAPA should benefit.


Godspeed!



OYS

Wait, corndogs have entitlement issues? That's pretty funny. I suppose you've forgotten that you (and others) think they're entitled to a SWA captain seat. Talk about entitlement issues. I really think you should look that up before you spout off, OYS. At the very least, think before you type. Hmmm... Let's see:

OYS: "They should be captains at SWA because they were captains at Airtrran."

Bubba: "Well we dont think so, because they're not senior enough to hold a captainship (5 years vs 10 years, etc.). It should be okay though, because they're all getting raises in pay and benefits, even if they are downgraded."

OYS: "It's not about the money, it's about quality of life."

Bubba: "Well, if THAT's true, than they should be happy-- as a mid level F/O insead of a junior captain, their QOL is much higher. Weekends off, better vacations, etc. Oh yeah, plus they make more money."

OYS: "Well they should still be captains. Uh... just ... because."

Bubba: "Gotcha."

I suppose that once someone makes captain at any airline, they should be guaranteed to be a captain for life. Why? Because they're entitled. Right, OYS?

Bubba

 

[chillidawg]

Nicely said Bubba.

 

[UALX727]

They're being feathered in with an average loss of seniority of approx 2-1/2 years.
Bubba

I believe that you are correct with the average loss being 2 1/2 years.

But keep in mind that number is a bit misleading, most of us are getting a 3 1/2 year loss from date of hire. The guys that haven't been here very long are skewing the averages a bit. FWIW.

 

[redflyer65]

Nice beat down bubba. I was about to welcome both Fubag and Up His Six to their 100th Southwest thread. Talk about two Jackwagons. Holy Sh!t.

RF

 

[hockeypilot44]

The Southwest pilots will not vote down any of these SLI agreements. These agreements are best case scenario for the SWA pilots. It seems the plan is to just keep throwing unfair one-sided agreements at the Airtran pilots with the hope they will vote to keep one out of fear of losing their jobs. It is not right. I don't inderstand why the MEC would send this agreement to a vote after turning down the first one. Hopefully 100 percent of the Airtran pilots vote no and show unification.