Former Tranny bidding SW Captain prior to 2015?

[FlyinGuy]

He does not stand a chance in winning this because the language is very clear. I guess if he wins, someone can file a counter grievance to have the whole SLI thrown out because his success will nullify SL 10. Too much drama for me...

 

[b747dogg]

Yes, he did.

Yes, he is.

Yes, he and I talked about it before he went over (MCO 737 CA, I flew with him on his last trip at AAI).

As to the likelihood of his success... who knows. Stranger things have happened (Twomey-Kasher is the grievance on reserve pay that you're referring to), but I wouldn't hold my breath. The intent of the language and the actual verbiage of SL10 is pretty clear, although his position that he voted against the SLI and therefore never personally agreed to the conditions and restrictions of the AAI LOA and the SIA (and no longer being an AAI employee is no longer bound by the AAI contract language) and since he was not able to vote on SL10 he therefore can't be bound by its stipulations either is an interesting position.

Again, not a grievance I would file, but to each his own.

Sounds like the kinda of guy we want here at SWA. By the time the grievance process is over, it will be 2015 anyways. Maybe, I can file a grievance and get my Airtran DOH 98' back. I'll let you how it works out for me! Cheers.

 

[27 driver]

What I find interesting is that he is now represented by SWAPA. Does SWAPA fight for him or against him. If they do not represent him fairly they may face DFR problems. Win or lose this will be interesting to watch.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Is this one of the guys that has a lawsuit against ALPA currently?

 

[fam62c]

What the heck, why not swing the bat?

 

[SWA Bubba]

Why do you SW guys keep referring to yourself as Fort Myers FL?

Probably the same reason you Airtran guys refer to youseguys (is that better?) as Fresno, CA.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Yes, he did.

Yes, he is.

Yes, he and I talked about it before he went over (MCO 737 CA, I flew with him on his last trip at AAI).

As to the likelihood of his success... who knows. Stranger things have happened (Twomey-Kasher is the grievance on reserve pay that you're referring to), but I wouldn't hold my breath. The intent of the language and the actual verbiage of SL10 is pretty clear, although his position that he voted against the SLI and therefore never personally agreed to the conditions and restrictions of the AAI LOA and the SIA (and no longer being an AAI employee is no longer bound by the AAI contract language) and since he was not able to vote on SL10 he therefore can't be bound by its stipulations either is an interesting position.

Again, not a grievance I would file, but to each his own.

Seems like a waste of everyone's time to me. Voting against an agreement (not "personally agreeing" to its language) has never made a difference in any election in the world--otherwise no democratic vote would have any meaning whatsoever on the 'no' voters. And his position that he wasn't able to vote on the SWAPA side for SL10 won't hold any water either, any more than someone who gets hired in 2012 can bitch about or deny the stipulations of a contract agreed to in 2011.

I can't imagine that this "grievance" will amount to anything more than a personal bitchfest anyway, because the union has to carry a grievance for it to move forward. As they always say: the grievance belongs to the union, not the individual. The union doesn't have to carry every complaint a member has into a grievance anyway (there's lots of member complaints that get tossed by the union), which they won't here, because the bitch is against the actual meaning of the contract agreed to by the union in the first place. Your "surprising" Twomey-Kasher reserve grievance was undoubtedly one pursued by the union itself, not JUST one individual.... right? This issue will NOT be carried to the company as a "grievance."

As far as a DFR issue, I suspect that he will learn that you can only grieve a violation of the contract, not if you don't like what it says, didn't vote for it, or weren't even around to vote on it in the first place. This seems like Unionism 101 to me.

The union (SWAPA in this case) will tell him to pound sand, and if wants to continue pursuing it, he'll have to file a DFR lawsuit against the union. In that case, I think he'll have a hard time finding a reputable labor lawyer to take the case. Even if he does, it'll be a waste of his money (and some SWAPA money as well, of course) when he gets laughed out of court.

I predict that he's just doing this to make a point. When SWAPA tells him that he has no merit and that it won't be "grieved," he'll probably just drop it, considering his point made. You seem to know him, Lear... Do you think he'll continue pushing it when it's his own money on the line?

Bubba

 

[scoreboardII]

The union won't let it get past filing, they'll refuse to accept, hope this "friend" has deep pockets to sue.

Some guys like guns, boats, golf. Some like to sue.

 

[HighSpeedClimb]

What a schmuck, nuf said..,,

 

[Lear70]

I like guns and boats but not golf... Is it an all or nothing kind of thing?

I wouldn't call him a friend, although we've spoken often about union issues over the years. Nice enough guy but in truth, I think he's sued AirTran more times than any other pilot and has a pretty good track record.

Interestingly enough, scope, pay, and retirement issues can sometimes be labeled a "Major Dispute" and can be carried by the grievant directly to the NMB. There's usually a hearing to determine that.

I agree that it will be interesting to see how SWAPA responds although they bear a Duty of Fair representation to the SWAPA pilots as a whole and they negotiated the SIA to preclude upgrades by former AAI pilots before 1/1/15 so I doubt a DFR suit over that would carry any weight but I've been wrong before.