Email from Airtran MEC: Secret MOU between SWA and SWAPA

[freightdogfred]

I think even GK would admit he's been speaking out of both sides of his mouth since day one. He has consistently said one thing, and done completely the opposite. To have expected him to stand by anything he agreed to in the first agreement is truly laughable.

 

[HowardBorden]

To have expected him to stand by anything he agreed to in the first agreement is truly laughable.

Of course it is laughable. That agreement never reached a member ratification vote. If you truly thought that deal would be kept alive and you could pick and choose the parts you liked and get rid of the parts you didn't like, you are delusional.

It was a package deal. Take it or leave it. Your MEC chose to leave it, which of course is their prerogative.

Many folks on this board and others counseled that the next one that comes along will be worse than the first offer. They were right.

 

[maxblast72]

By posting pay rates from our 2001 contract in order to bolster your argument, you have invalidated your already specious argument.

You were selected to officially represent your fellow pilots; by coming on this public forum you are abusing that trust and embarassing yourself. Give it a rest. Seriously.

You need to go read the following arbitration awards:

- AirTran/Southwest Dispatchers
- AirTran/Southwest Rampers
- Delta/Northwest pilots
- Mesaba/Colgan/Pinnacle pilots
- Frontier/Midwest/Republic pilots
- Shuttle America/Chautauqua pilots
- America West/USAirways pilots

None of those awards would apply directly to our situation (since every merger is unique). However, if you think the arbitration panel was going to ignore SWA's superior balance sheet, CBA, and older pilot group, I got a bridge to sell you in Nevada.

Gary Kelly was correct on July 14th when he told everyone in the room that his package would be better comprehensively than anything the AirTran pilots would get in arbitration.

Gary Kelly knew that most AirTran pilots live paycheck to paycheck and would not be in a position to test him or call his bluff on plan B. You wouldn't believe the emails the MC got on August 22 after Gary Kelly's chilly email. Guys that were the biggest "No" guys just a week earlier were crapping their pants.

It is what it is. Time to learn from history and move on.

 

[freightdogfred]

Of course it is laughable. That agreement never reached a member ratification vote. If you truly thought that deal would be kept alive and you could pick and choose the parts you liked and get rid of the parts you didn't like, you are delusional.

It was a package deal. Take it or leave it. Your MEC chose to leave it, which of course is their prerogative.

Many folks on this board and others counseled that the next one that comes along will be worse than the first offer. They were right.

My point is that had the first deal been voted in, GK still would have reneged on any provision he chose, such as fences, pay etc. Numerous SWAPA members who post here affirmed it to be his right as a "business decision". So be it. I really don't care what he says or does at this point as long as he keeps that balance sheet above 6.992B. I'm a stockholder now, I buy stock monthly so if he plays hardball with SWAPA over section six i'm all for that too.

I hope to make lots of friends over there. ( Ben franklin, grant etc.)

 

[Kharma Police]

Well u could of kept the ATL 10year fence too but that's GKs and SWAPAs fault right?

Easy Maverick, you're on the highway to the danger zone regarding hurting your future FAT FO's feelings. We are very sensitive....

 

[HowardBorden]

My point is that had the first deal been voted in, GK still would have reneged on any provision he chose, such as fences, pay etc. Numerous SWAPA members who post here affirmed it to be his right as a "business decision". So be it. I really don't care what he says or does at this point as long as he keeps that balance sheet above 6.992B. I'm a stockholder now, I buy stock monthly so if he plays hardball with SWAPA over section six i'm all for that too.

I hope to make lots of friends over there. ( Ben franklin, grant etc.)

Any agreement would have been part of your CBA, just like any agreement would have become part of SWAPA's CBA. It would be ALPA's duty to enforce their CBA just like SWAPA. If you are worried about ALPA's ability or desire to spend much capital enforcing an agreement from a pilot group soon to be leaving the organization, then I can see your point.

Trust me he will play hardball in section 6 just as in any negotiation with a union group. Remember, any gains or losses in section 6 will be shared by both groups in 2015.

 

[madjack]

Kharma,

Your dangerous

 

[Kharma Police]

Kharma,

Your dangerous

Does this mean we can play beach volleyball together?

 

[Britpilot]

Many folks on this board and others counseled that the next one that comes along will be worse than the first offer. They were right.

There should never have been any offer.
We were supposed to be negotiating a list. The company took it upon themselves to stick their nose in and ultimately intimidate and bully the ATI pilots.
Nothing can be done about this now, it's history but I will never trust them or SWAPA.

 

[freightdogfred]

Gary Kelly knew that most AirTran pilots live paycheck to paycheck and would not be in a position to test him or call his bluff on plan B.

How can you post such drivel? GK might be a demigod down in DFT, but I doubt he has inside info on individual pilot's personal fiscal situation.

Maybe you're speaking about your own personal situation, I don't know.

 

[HowardBorden]

There should never have been any offer.
We were supposed to be negotiating a list. The company took it upon themselves to stick their nose in and ultimately intimidate and bully the ATI pilots.
Nothing can be done about this now, it's history but I will never trust them or SWAPA.

Again and again I keep pointing out that SWA was invited into the negotiations through the process agreement, yet that point falls on deaf ears. Why were they invited if they were not expected to participate? Did SWA bully the other 3 parties into signing that document?

 

[Britpilot]

Again and again I keep pointing out that SWA was invited into the negotiations through the process agreement, yet that point falls on deaf ears. Why were they invited if they were not expected to participate? Did SWA bully the other 3 parties into signing that document?

Again and again you miss the point.
We were negotiating a list.
SWA could have participated all they wanted. Instead they took over and the rest is history.

 

[Britpilot]

How can you post such drivel? GK might be a demigod down in DFT, but I doubt he has inside info on individual pilot's personal fiscal situation.

Maybe you're speaking about your own personal situation, I don't know.

Common knowledge as far as ATI FO's were concerned. Not difficult to figure out.

 

[maxblast72]

How can you post such drivel? GK might be a demigod down in DFT, but I doubt he has inside info on individual pilot's personal fiscal situation.

Maybe you're speaking about your own personal situation, I don't know.

You don't think Fornaro clued Gary Kelly about AirTran pilots during discussions in 2010?

My personal situation. Wife and I plan to be totally debt free (including house) in less than 18 months. I am ready to go on strike for a year if SWAPA asks me too. Doubt that will be necessary.

 

[scoreboardII]

Again and again you miss the point.
We were negotiating a list.
SWA could have participated all they wanted. Instead they took over and the rest is history.

Nothing in the three party agreement prevented SwA from interjecting in the list. In fact the agreement specifically gave SwA the right, the privilege and the duty to do just that.

You are ignoring facts to write your own history. You need to wake up and smell the coffee we call "reality of facts"