ATN ALPA Recalls Move Forward

[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