Looks like I was right about the failed SWA TA

[The Prussian]

This place is becoming Friggin Idiots.com!!!....GOSH!!!!

 

[Monster Buck]

I will vote no again. And again. And again if I have to. It's not about the money it's about MY future. I will not accept a contract that farms out my future and that of my WN bretheren.

Gup

Man I'll tell ya. If more people understood this our power to negotiate actually grows stronger contract over contract, since the wages the pilots fight for will actually go to the pilots IN that company. Its awesome to have great wages, who doesn't want them, but if you don't fly that plane anymore your wage is ZERO! Go ask a Midwest pilot how his or her wage is.

 

[shearedshaft]

So you think you're trading wages for some mythical "no outsourcing of my job" clause in the contract? Where, exactly, is that clause you're looking for?

No domestic codeshare? It was in the TA. Near international can't get greater than six percent? In the TA.

Voting no? Gets rid of all codeshare protections. You voted FOR codeshare by voting no, instead of against codeshare.

The good news is that you gave up pay to get unlimited codeshare. Nice work!

 

[firstthird]

Scope language was great--if it flies in the US, SWAPA pilots fly it. Codeshare language was great--for far international codeshare. It was very weak for near international codeshare.

But it prohibited ALL domestic codeshare, I've never seen that in any other pilot contract.

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).

 

[firstthird]

No domestic codeshare? It was in the TA. Near international can't get greater than six percent? In the TA.

Voting no? Gets rid of all codeshare protections. You voted FOR codeshare by voting no, instead of against codeshare.

The good news is that you gave up pay to get unlimited codeshare. Nice work!

domestic - addressed above. although it was one of the better parts of the TA.

international - 6% is basically all of Westjet and Volaris. All of their possible flying didn't add up to 6% of what we do. thus it was a meaningless 'limit.'

We temporarily delayed raises (and retro) to protect our QOL. someday you'll understand (or actually maybe you won't, it seems you've got a direct line to the chief pilot talking points memos though) and you'll thank us for your QOL, pay and codeshare protections.

 

[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.