Looks like I was right about the failed SWA TA

[Scope out RJ's]

Not to worry. Looks like they're putting your raises to good use!

Southwest launches another fare sale

Southwest Airlines Co. (NYSE:LUV) has launched another fare sale.
The Dallas-based carrier is offering flights for as low as $49 each way for travel between Aug. 18 and Nov. 18.
That includes $49 flights between Phoenix and Los Angeles, Albuquerque and Anaheim and San Diego.
Southwest is offering $99 one-way flights to Portland, Reno, Nev., Houston, Seattle and San Antonio.
This fare sale follows on a similar one started by Southwest earlier this month. Tempe-based US Airways Group (NYSE:LCC) and American Airlines matched those fares and were expected to match some of Southwest’s new deals as well.
Airlines are trying to boost sagging consumer and business travel demand.

 

[shearedshaft]

You overstate the section one of the TA by half.

The TA gave away distribution. The TA allowed RJs if we acquire another airline. The TA allowed domestic codeshare with the agreement of the association (read voice vote by BOD, not vote of membership).

How, exactly do we have a "no RJ" clause if we purchase someone with RJs? How would that work?

Southwest purchases Morris Air. Morris has 10 EMB 145s.

Now what? The contract says (said) "You can keep the ones you got, but it's capped at that point."

What's the big deal with this? The RJs came with the purchase and can't grow to take over our jobs. If they're making money for Morris, how are we better off by getting rid of them? Especially since they'll be flown by SWA pilots?

By voting no, you just told the company that not only could they buy a company with RJs and grow the RJs, they could go outside to Republic and start codesharing using RJs.

Rememember: the TA had more restrictions than nothing. You voted for nothing. You got...nothing. Except a pay cut.

 

[firstthird]

SL32 has more restrictions than the TA in some cases. SL32 is still in force. Come December, if we haven't grown and we are still codesharing or in a marketing agreement, then it is grievance time. The TA let SWA out of most (the important ones) of the growth requirements of SL32 and relaxed the codeshare language. In many, many ways, we are better off with our POS 15 year old 33 side letter CBA than we would've been under TA1 and most certainly than we'd be under Gary's current offer, which the union showed the good sense to decline outright.

of course, we'll probably get some FO that knows better who will start a petition and try to overrule the BOD. and it goes to a vote and gets rejected 90% to 10%. oh wait, that happened 2.5 years ago already.

I didn't vote for nothing. I voted to maintain the current CBA under the RLA. look into it, you might learn something.

p.s. still looking for you on the SWA pilot only forums. are you afraid to engage where the ideas flow more freely and the discussion is more real?

 

[shearedshaft]

Why are you "looking for me"? Sounds kind of creepy.

You know as well as I do that "debillitating circumstances" make SL32 moot. You can wait and watch me be proved right...again.

You made an expensive, and ultimately useless choice. Gary's letter confirms this. Or do you think we're now better off after reading his letter? I've noticed you haven't addressed the most recent offer. I assume you think it's better than the last offer, since that's why you preached voting no, correct? that the next offer HAD to be better? Remember?

 

[firstthird]

not the next offer. the one we vote yes on will be better or I won't vote yes. If it is TA2 that is better than TA1 and good enough, then I'll vote yes. Gary's letter is worse by a long way. The BOD wouldn't even touch it and that is saying something considering that many of them are still fighting the TA1 battle in the RP.

It's on!

 

[njcapt]

You made an expensive, and ultimately useless choice. Gary's letter confirms this. Or do you think we're now better off after reading his letter? I've noticed you haven't addressed the most recent offer. I assume you think it's better than the last offer, since that's why you preached voting no, correct? that the next offer HAD to be better? Remember?

If you take what is an obvious propaganda feed by your Chief Executive at face value you are not only lacking in judgment, but intelligence. They attempted a 50%+1 end run around the new Negotiating Committee and were told to pound sand - a refreshing example of leadership from your BOD.

You are either a SWA management plant or woefully ignorant of negotiating principles.

 

[redflyer65]

Shearedshaft,

How is unlimited RJ's if we just purchase the entire company good?

What if we bought Republic and every plane they have after the ink is dry?

You OK with that?

 

[GuppyWN]

Shearedshaft just doesn't understand the value of keeping pilot jobs on SWA property and thinks that battle has already been lost so why fight it. Take the money and shut up.

Well that battle has NOT been lost. January 1, 2010 SWA will be out of compliance with SL32 and their choices will be to buy about 35 airplanes overnight or stop codesharing/distribution.

That is an oversimplification but you get the idea.

Gup

 

[Nevets]

Near international can't get greater than six percent? In the TA.

Curious, if SWA meets the growth requirement, how much above 6% can they go? And is SWA scheduled aircraft delivery currently at the growth requirement?

 

[airlinepilot]

Gary's letter is a sign of weakness. The company saves lots of money by not having to pay the 401K match and profit sharing (for the past 2+ years). For some reason Gary needs the contract signed, sealed and delievered). My guess is the company has some major things it wants to do such as code share or even buying someone. It is far from over but clearly Gary thought they could get it done quickly and cheaper. The Union said "not so fast". I think that Carl and the rest of his buds finally has the message and I believe the ball is really in our court.

 

[shearedshaft]

Shearedshaft,

How is unlimited RJ's if we just purchase the entire company good?

What if we bought Republic and every plane they have after the ink is dry?

You OK with that?

Under the TA, if we bought another company that had RJs, the number of RJs was capped, it couldn't grow. The pilots would have to be integrated into the SWAPA seniority list. No big deal.

However, after rejecting the TA, we can now purchase a carrier with RJs and there is no limit (I'll repeat, no limit) on what they can do with the RJs, they can expand the subsidiary.

Also, under the failed TA, there was zero, none, nada, not at all, nothing in terms of domestic codeshare allowed.

After the TA was rejected, we now have ourselves a situation where tomorrow, Gary Kelly could call up Republic and start flying Houston to Lubbock (hey General). We have zero recourse, nothing in our current contract, that was preached as so much better than the TA says he can't do that.

Simplified: Under the TA, no RJs, unless we purchase another carrier, then the RJs are capped and the pilots join our list.

Under the current, 1994 contract you guys stuck us with, there are ZERO restrictions on domestic codeshare. None.

 

[shootr]

Shortshaft,

You are not correct and do not understand the failed TA. Here's an "out there" example but maybe simple enough for you to understand...

We buy Mother Delta. We would merge SWA and Delta lists. All the RJ contracts would still be in effect so Skywest, Comair, ASA, and anyone else they are using at the time would now be our connection carriers. No domestic RJ's, huh?

You spout a good emotional rant but you have very little idea what you are actually talking about. If what Gary offers us $ucks, we'll say no again. The current contract is fine until we get it ironed out.

shootr

 

[Diesel-9]

How can SWA buy anyone right now? Are you aware of your balance sheet?

 

[scoreboardII]

Gary's letter is fear. Promoting fear in hopes a segment of the pilot group will revolt and demand passage. That won't happen. The second part is Gary's fear he won't get a contract completed which gives him some level of lattitude in doing his close international crap. Without a contract, he is bound by SL32 which prevents codeshare without growth, and prevents ancillary revenue attempts of point and click website sale of other airline seats.

He needs this contract as bad as we want it. But he needs it, we have the ball on this one. Lets not screw this up and get all testy.

 

[ASADFW7]

This doe not look like fun

 

[redflyer65]

How about we buy Republic and 200+ RJ's and start parking 737's. Yes they would not be able to purchase anymore RJ's but what about parking ours? Make sense now?

Massive loophole that could have cost us most of our jobs....

 

[Nevets]

Under the TA, if we bought another company that had RJs, the number of RJs was capped, it couldn't grow. The pilots would have to be integrated into the SWAPA seniority list. No big deal.

However, after rejecting the TA, we can now purchase a carrier with RJs and there is no limit (I'll repeat, no limit) on what they can do with the RJs, they can expand the subsidiary.

Also, under the failed TA, there was zero, none, nada, not at all, nothing in terms of domestic codeshare allowed.

After the TA was rejected, we now have ourselves a situation where tomorrow, Gary Kelly could call up Republic and start flying Houston to Lubbock (hey General). We have zero recourse, nothing in our current contract, that was preached as so much better than the TA says he can't do that.

Simplified: Under the TA, no RJs, unless we purchase another carrier, then the RJs are capped and the pilots join our list.

Under the current, 1994 contract you guys stuck us with, there are ZERO restrictions on domestic codeshare. None.

Curious, if SWA meets the growth requirement, how much above 6% can they go? And is SWA scheduled aircraft delivery currently at the growth requirement?

 

[SevenThreeSeven]

I am so proud of my union brethren who understood the issues on this TA and agreed the increase in wages were far less important than the swiss cheese loopholes in section 1 that could be of far greater impact in the near future.

I am embarrassed by shearedshift coming on here AFTER the vote to whine about losing his payraise. And he has clearly shown he did not properly educate himself on everything else in the TA except payrates.

I traded my payraise to make sure not one single union brother at SWA loses job to outsourcing, merger, or acquisition. I will do it again.

 

[MILPILOT17]

I am so proud of my union brethren who understood the issues on this TA and agreed the increase in wages were far less important than the swiss cheese loopholes in section 1 that could be of far greater impact in the near future.

I am embarrassed by shearedshift coming on here AFTER the vote to whine about losing his payraise. And he has clearly shown he did not properly educate himself on everything else in the TA except payrates.

I traded my payraise to make sure not one single union brother at SWA loses job to outsourcing, merger, or acquisition. I will do it again.

We have a winner!!!!!! Nice post!

 

[GuppyWN]

That post right there? It doesn't suck!

Gup