Factual Reasons for Relative - SWA/ATN

[GoodTimes]

...(not saying anything about fairness one way or another, just doing the math).



....Obviously this solution leaves the top of the list solidly SWA pilots for a decade, but I don't know what that does for the rest of the list or where senior people at either company clump the top of the list at snapshots 15 and 20 years out...



....might provide the "neutral" ground we need.



My head hurts when I read things like this. Lear, were you on earth last week?

 

[scoreboardII]

Lear, your feathered option, how does that end up at a pilots retirement point? If you run the spreadsheet, you'll see that SL9 preserved everyones post merger endgame monetary position. Anything less and in 10-15 years, the AT pilots own the top of the list due to their inherent younger demographics (up wards of 10 years younger), and SWA guys take a huge loss in retirement income, to the tune of $100K plus.

Some will fall outside those norms (older AT FO's, older SWA FO's), but on average, SL9 fit the bill of no harm to SWA pilots. As for me, SL9 places me within 1% current position at end game, anything less would be unfair, inequitable, and cause harm.

 

[boeing717]

...(not saying anything about fairness one

My head hurts when I read things like this. Lear, were you on earth last week?[/QUOTE]

He was with his ALPA friends talking the agreement down. PCL and him are two of the people that talk down the agreement. At least PCL says in FI. Lear says one thing on FI and then another away from here. He is trying to keep friendly so if it happens he can say he likes it. He doesn't want to be like Ty, Karma and PCL.

 

[Lear70]

...(not saying anything about fairness one way or another, just doing the math).

....Obviously this solution leaves the top of the list solidly SWA pilots for a decade, but I don't know what that does for the rest of the list or where senior people at either company clump the top of the list at snapshots 15 and 20 years out...

....might provide the "neutral" ground we need.

My head hurts when I read things like this. Lear, were you on earth last week?

See... this is why I went into hiatus and why I'm going back there after this post. You are taking two completely different thoughts and combining them, which is the pure definition of "taking a statement out of context."

The "neutral" ground I referred to was in the last paragraph talking about a dynamic seniority list, not in reference to the ratio'd list that Boiler referred to and I simply did the math on. Don't mix the two, as they were two seperate seniority list ideas.

Score, I already said I haven't seen what that list looks like. I wish I had a full day with the MC to see what the computer spits out with scenarios like the above, but I don't. Like I said, I was just doing the math since no one on here had actually discussed that scenario in "real life" numbers. There was no intention of getting into a debate about it...

 

[Lear70]

My head hurts when I read things like this. Lear, were you on earth last week?

He was with his ALPA friends talking the agreement down. PCL and him are two of the people that talk down the agreement. At least PCL says in FI. Lear says one thing on FI and then another away from here. He is trying to keep friendly so if it happens he can say he likes it. He doesn't want to be like Ty, Karma and PCL.

Last week I was actually home all week, thanks, Judas.

Contrary to your assertion, I already came on here after the agreement was voted down and said the seniority list was just too much to give up. I already said that we greatly appreciate the economic incentives GK offered, but the seniority list itself was just too much of a hit for our members to take. Myself included.

Doesn't mean I don't favor a negotiated solution, why don't you post what I put on our internal board about THAT last week (and got bashed for by many of our pilots)? Oh wait, that wouldn't fit your agenda.

So don't come on here thinking you're "outing" me. I talk more directly with our pilots, certainly, as likely many SWA pilots do between here and their own board, but I don't "say one thing on FI and then another away from here." If you'd like to discuss it further, why don't you contact me personally on our board, rather than hide behind anonymity here?

I didn't think so.

 

[terrehautesux]

Relative will not happen. I don't think it is fair and it wouldn't be in the best interests of our culture.

How do we threaten your "culture"?

 

[boeing717]

How do we threaten your "culture"?

I think he means you will not help it. With your group of ALPA members I also think you would not fit in there. Sorry, but facts are facts. Your group with some exceptions are misfits and that is why they do not want you.

 

[ASADFW7]

SWA threaten the cultus buying AAI.

 

[terrehautesux]

I think he means you will not help it. With your group of ALPA members I also think you would not fit in there. Sorry, but facts are facts. Your group with some exceptions are misfits and that is why they do not want you.

that's pretty funny.

 

[boeing717]

Last week I was actually home all week, thanks, Judas.

Contrary to your assertion, I already came on here after the agreement was voted down and said the seniority list was just too much to give up. I already said that we greatly appreciate the economic incentives GK offered, but the seniority list itself was just too much of a hit for our members to take. Myself included.

Doesn't mean I don't favor a negotiated solution, why don't you post what I put on our internal board about THAT last week (and got bashed for by many of our pilots)? Oh wait, that wouldn't fit your agenda.

So don't come on here thinking you're "outing" me. I talk more directly with our pilots, certainly, as likely many SWA pilots do between here and their own board, but I don't "say one thing on FI and then another away from here." If you'd like to discuss it further, why don't you contact me personally on our board, rather than hide behind anonymity here?

I didn't think so.

Since we are still on the same side of the yard it is better this way. However, I have said this too you before and if you knew who I was you would agree. So, keep trying to hide but remember, "you can take the animal out of the jungle but you cannot take the jungle out of the animal". Get it? You are what you are and people that know you realize that. Your record speaks for it self. Enjoy your time off the computer. However, you will be back soon because you cannot stay away.

 

[GuppyWN]

I already said that we greatly appreciate the economic incentives GK offered, but the seniority list itself was just too much of a hit for our members to take. Myself included.

Now that Gary has taken the money off the table do you feel you will get even more seniority?

Gup

 

[Lear70]

Since we are still on the same side of the yard it is better this way. However, I have said this too you before and if you knew who I was you would agree. So, keep trying to hide but remember, "you can take the animal out of the jungle but you cannot take the jungle out of the animal". Get it? You are what you are and people that know you realize that. Your record speaks for it self. Enjoy your time off the computer. However, you will be back soon because you cannot stay away.

Well, that narrows it down to 2 people, and I would bet you're JC; or you could just message me directly instead of being coy or catty about it. People who can't "man up" to their own thoughts and words have absolutely zero credibility and certainly garner no respect.

Again, since you're attempting to discredit me to the SWA pilots here, why don't you tell them what I posted last week as a "compromise position" that still ended up giving them the ISL they wanted? Oh, and copy what I stated TO OUR OWN PILOTS about "needing a compromise solution that preserved the culture"? Oh wait, that wouldn't fit with the picture you're trying to paint of me. Here, I'll help you out, since it's my own post:

Forum Topic: Mediation - your one solution to come to an agreement.

Posted - August 19 2011 : 17:38:47

I'm working on that. It's a sliding scale seniority inside the existing ISL that keeps our relative seniority on a GLOBAL combined list moving forward, sliding back each year in a ratio equal to the number of people who retire and who are hired at the bottom until we reach the ISL final position or 2020, whichever happens first.

In this methodology, your seniority WOULD decrease each year, but it would afford you the same quality of life you have NOW each year as you move down the total list, but the people above you are upgrading, the people below you taking their place, and you stay put in a "relative" position.

That way we keep our existing quality of life as we move into Southwest bases, we're only moving into SWA bases as the airplanes are going over so they aren't going to get "pushed down" - we bring new lines of flying with our aircraft as we come over with them, and we don't get bounced throughout the system with "secondary displacements" or other movement.

No CA loses his seat. No one gets involuntarily displaced except as the global list would do the same to their pilots. It doesn't ask SWA pilots to take a lesser integration, nor does it delay the upgrades from what the AIP delivered.

Fix the loopholes with how many people transition over with each aircraft, fix the way they flex ATL to have the target 850 people in base, but a minimum no lower than what they initially wanted until the 2020 mix, and let the seniority itself take care of the ATL fence issues.

Working on the details of how the trigger points would work, will present it to the MC and MEC when I get it fleshed out, hopefully by the end of this 4-day.

and then in a follow-up to one of the several people who gave me crap about that post:

Posted - August 19 2011 : 18:13:02

In my mind, I don't believe SWAPA will move very much off their current position (if they even come back to the table at all before the end of arbitration when I suspect they'll throw one more lowball offer at us hoping that we're scared), hence this idea that modifies what they have with protections that DO work.

I'm looking at the long-term big picture. We will have to work with these people for decades to come. If we get something that they feel is DRAMATICALLY unfair, they can tie it up for several years and make it miserable for us when we do come over. If they get something that they feel is unfair but GK forces them to swallow it, they have the transition items to negotiate WITHOUT OUR INPUT that they can make life miserable for us.

Do we integrate? I'd say 99% certainly; I'm not worried about losing my job. Do we ruin the SWA culture in the process? Possibly, and that's not acceptable to me. Do we possibly lose lots of things like 717 pay, longevity, probationary periods, sick and vacation time accrual? Possibly, according to the attorneys - there are some ugly possibilities that we'd have a difficult time fighting - they're not job loss, but they suck.

I'd prefer to come to a solution that preserves our Quality of Life while being sensitive to their concerns moving forward. That's the only way we're going to come to a negotiated solution. If it's not achievable, I can live with that, but I can't live with not trying my best to help find a solution that works.

Hope you understand. I value the input of both my friends who were against this and friends who were for it, and hope you understand I'm just doing what I feel is right for the majority of our pilots and the combined airline as a whole moving forward.

So, as you can see, I'm trying to be part of the SOLUTION, rather than part of the PROBLEM as you obviously are, inciting unrest and dissension in the ranks and even here on FlightInfo. Good luck with your recall; I give your odds of success 1 chance in 10.

 

[Lear70]

Now that Gary has taken the money off the table do you feel you will get even more seniority?

Gup

I have no idea. I feel reasonably certain that now that our Merger Committee knows that the list wasn't acceptable to the MEC (and likely have specific guidance now), that they likely won't bring back a list the same or worse, as the MEC would probably do the same thing again. Other than that, my magic 8 ball seems to be stuck on "ask again later".

Hence my "middle ground" solution I just posted. Wasn't going to post it on here but since some people seem hell-bound on destroying my credibility here, felt like I had no choice but to post my thoughts that I put on our internal board which are nearly identical to what I post here.

I already submitted it to our Merger Committee. If something happens because of it, great. If not, well, I tried. :beer:

 

[slaquer5]

Lear70 don't worry about anyone trying to change my mind about you. I am positive you will be a snake in the grass at SWA and have at least several law suits against SWA in your future.

 

[Lear70]

Lear70 don't worry about anyone trying to change my mind about you. I am positive you will be a snake in the grass at SWA and have at least several law suits against SWA in your future.

Opinions vary.

The 4 letters of commendation in my file in the last year alone for customer service and professionalism notwithstanding...

 

[GuppyWN]

Lear,

I appreciate your input but - no way bro.

Relative Seniority sliding backwards for a decade? And keep your seat?

You think you get it...... but you don't get it.

Thanks for trying.
Gup

 

[Lear70]

Well, all I can do is try. :0

And just so I know you understood what I mean, it means it STARTS at relative seniority now, when the lists are separate. Only about 400 of us would even interact with your pilots with that seniority in any meaningful way (the 737 pilots who aren't in ATL) and not until they all transition across the "partition" which means it's 3 years before all those 400 would even be interacting, at which time they would have already lost 8-9% of that relative seniority.

Your pilots keep moving up with attrition, our pilots keep sliding backwards, until we end up where the ISL was, at the same time the fences come down, approximately 6 years after integration. We get to keep our Quality of Life at absolutely NO expense to SWA pilots and end up on the list where "no SWA pilot is harmed".

If that's not good enough, then I'm out of ideas.

 

[GoodTimes]

Lear,

I'm with Gup. You're in the know about the negotiations, but fail to acknowledge that SL9 was, for the SWA side, a sh#t sandwich. And to top it off here you are posting ideas that suppose we can come to a deal if your side manages to make gains in seniority.

"I feel reasonably certain that now that our Merger Committee knows that the list wasn't acceptable to the MEC"

I feel absolutely certain our NC knows the list wasn't acceptable to our membership.

 

[Lear70]

Well, then back to lurking I go. I tried.

Best of luck to all of us.

 

[On Your Six]

Now that Gary has taken the money off the table do you feel you will get even more seniority?

Gup

It can only get better with arbitration(if it goes there), and the money will be there eventually. There won't be a B-scale forever. You know that. Plus, the AT guys as a group are young enough to absorb a small temporary hit, and that's what it really is over a career. Eventually they will hit the money pot after they get the fair seniority number.


OYS