My response to SWA package!

[Lear70]

As an outside person looking in I am a bit amazed there is not more discussion of McCaskill-Bond. Clearly that legislation changed airline mergers forever. One person’s opinion to the detriment of the SWA pilots in this merger.

We hashed that back and forth for 30 pages about 2 months ago...

In short, the SWA argument is that M/B might never be triggered unless the two airlines are actually merged. There has been talk of "loopholes" in the Process Agreement that all 4 parties signed that would let them out of integration.

The AAI argument is that the Process Agreement, plus a side letter signed by their management binding Southwest to our Sec 1 language (which requires integration), plus public filings with the SEC, the DoT, the DoJ, the FAA, the NMB, and the shareholders, all say that integration has to happen.

For the most part, everyone has just agreed to disagree and moved on, realizing they aren't convincing us and we aren't convincing them. It occasionally pops up with newcomers from both airlines to the discussions, where it's briefly re-hashed, but for the most part, the rest of us have talked about it ad nauseum and realize it's not worth debating anymore.

Too much angst and totally not worth the discord it causes (like most of the threads here on FI).

 

[MILF Hunter]

What used to be doesn't matter. What's happening now does.

Read this statement Trannies. Lear gets it. Some of y'all like to dismiss the vast economic differences in our CBAs by saying that in decades past SWA rates were much lower than the legacies. Lear is right, though. The past is just that. What's happening now is that, regardless of the outcome, trannies will gain a lot.

On another note, one of my friends says y'all are dissecting the pay numbers in great detail on your forum. First, I'm quite sure SWAPA's numbers are factual. That's the funny thing in this case, reality is so powerful that there just isn't any need to fudge the numbers. Second, if y'all are so convinced that all the extra money won't mean anything in front of an arbitrator, then why get so wrapped up in it?

 

[madjack]

Lear said: "If you're looking for "equal gain", you're not going to find it." You must find equal gain for the SWA pilots to satisfy fair and equitable. If that does not come via $$ from SWA to "grease the skids" it must come from seniority...there is no other bargaining chips?? Arbitration is an unknown but it does protect the SWA pilots also...

 

[Flycatcher99]

I'm not offended by that statement, you're arguing passionately, not rudely, so it's all good. Hopefully my statements come across similarly... :beer:

Unfortunately, I can't promise you anything, I can only go on the growth that our MC, MEC, and Scheduling Committee tell us has to happen pretty quickly if we pick our aircraft frequency (how much each airframe flies per day) to where yours is. (Most of us already fly 80+ hours a month; can't get more flying out of us so if the planes fly more, we need more people.)

If we pick up our STATION frequency to our international destinations (which has been stated repeatedly by your management), we'll also need more people. Maybe we lose some lower-yield domestic cities (although I don't think so.. if our yields are good enough to those cities that we've kept them - yours will be better), but overall I doubt we'll lose more city pairings than we gain.

Again, as I mentioned in another post, AAI folks are trying to make the gains appear more even, and the only way they can do that is to repeatedly bring up talk of "explosive growth". Could that happen? Perhaps. Only two problems, with it, though.

First, growth benefits both sides. So it doesn't even the playing field.

Second, the talk on this end is not of growth, but of the more likely case of the need for less manning, for several reasons. One, it's doubtful to many here that we keep nearly all AAI's cities. Too many that can support minimal service, not within SWA's model. Two, SWA manning models are far less than AAI's. (And a corollary to that fact is the pilot hours per year that we fly here.)

Personally, I do believe there will be some growth, as necessitated by the extent of economic recovery we see, and also by GK's own statements about increasing flying out of ATL to something like 300 flights per day. But I don't see any kind of "explosive" growth, and in fact, we may see growth neutralized by the reasons I listed above.

I think reasonable folks on SWA's side see some good that will come from the merger, but even with retirements kicking in again in a year and a half, I think most see any upward movement as slow and methodical, at best. All this said, continued trumpeting of "growth" will not count for much in negotiation, if anything.

I'm *HOPING* that Southwest realizes the money gain disparity (which is where I think some of the SWAPA rhetoric is pointed) and steps in to help on the financial end in the immediately-near future with you guys to help "grease the wheels", in addition to whatever might come out of the Merger Committee.

Both they and SWAPA do, as has been evidenced in material we've received. They've done their homework, and then some. Having the best labor law firm in the world on retainer for the last two years helps.

But you can't think that we'd come on here and tell you how much seniority we're willing to give up in order to make it all go down smoothly, can ya? We just can't have that discussion openly right now... sometime in the future over beers when the dust settles, I'm sure people will tell you what they were hoping for and what was their minimum "happy" point. In many cases, they might get one, or both, or might not even get either one, you just never know.

Of course not. But we have been a bit taken aback with the brazenness with which some have made ridiculous demands. (Really not wanting to rehash that all again.)

You gotta have faith it will all work out, or it will drive you crazy!

Not going crazy, not in the least. Very happy to be where we are, and no matter what happens, I am still blessed to work for the best airline ever.

 

[madjack]

Another Learism: The AAI argument is that the Process Agreement, plus a side letter signed by their management binding Southwest to our Sec 1 language (which requires integration), plus public filings with the SEC, the DoT, the DoJ, the FAA, the NMB, and the shareholders, all say that integration has to happen.

Just to translate for our new viewers to this circus...the AAI counter threat is "if we (SWA pilots) don't agree to what our MC is demanding at negotiations we will just have the arbitrators take it from you..."

Both of these "threats" could be valid but they make the discussion less civil...

 

[madjack]

KP: Wow, I'm still quite amazed by the pettiness of you guys. You guys would still probably b!tch if we got stapled........
__________________

KP: Why the negative vibes, Add to the discussion, formulate a valid reclama...And I would not bitch if you got stapled...at all

 

[scoreboardII]

As for the rest, it's ludicrous to use the old rates. They don't exist anymore and can't be rolled back. .

Red card here Lear, foul buddy, 5 minute penalty box please.

There is a snapshot for a reason, everything in this negotiation revolves around the date of snapshot, all cards were on the table at that moment and all discussions revolve around what happens in the future based on that moment, NOT what is happening today with what happens in the future.:beer:

 

[scoreboardII]

You can use any numbers you want. Old, new, made up, it doesn't matter. The arbitrator doesn't care. He's going to be merging seniority lists, not pay scales.

Wow, how utterly nonfactual of you, what a surprise.

Seniority, based on fair and equitable, resulting in a comparison of many factors including career earnings.

Just wow buddy.

 

[redflyer65]

You can use any numbers you want. Old, new, made up, it doesn't matter. The arbitrator doesn't care. He's going to be merging seniority lists, not pay scales.

I say WOW as well. So hypothetically if Airtran would have bought say..Allegiant, you'd be perfectly fine with them enjoying your contract and payscales after the arbitor awards a 'fair'/ratio SLI for them with no seat bumps?

I guess in your world, the Southwest and Airtran pre-Sept contract were basically the same?

Absolutely amazing. Ain't gonna happen.

 

[Lear70]

Red card here Lear, foul buddy, 5 minute penalty box please.

Yeah, I knew I wasn't getting away with that without a counter-comment, but we can't agree on *EVERYTHING*,,, where would the fun be in THAT?

 

[PCL_128]

I say WOW as well. So hypothetically if Airtran would have bought say..Allegiant, you'd be perfectly fine with them enjoying your contract and payscales after the arbitor awards a 'fair'/ratio SLI for them with no seat bumps?

Of course. Why wouldn't I? It's not like their new money would be coming out of my pocket.

Absolutely amazing. Ain't gonna happen.

I think you and many others will be quite disappointed when this is all said and done.

 

[madjack]

PCL keep sayin and it will become true...it has to be a fair and eqitable deal for the SWA pilots....

 

[madjack]

PCL...THE WINDFALL CAN'T ALL GO TO AAI. YOU MUST SHARE THE GAINS WITH SWA PILOTS. That is fair and equitable...

 

[PCL_128]

PCL keep sayin and it will become true...it has to be a fair and eqitable deal for the SWA pilots....

Agreed. The problem is that you guys don't seem to understand that it is a fair and equitable integration of seniority, not pay rates, not days off, not longevity, etc. The arbitrator will seek to implement a list in a way that, to the greatest extent possible, preserves your pre-merger career expectations. If you had an expectation of being a captain in two years, for example, he will do his best to make sure that that still happens. But bumping AirTran captains out of their seats or stapling a few hundred FOs? Sorry, but that just ain't going to happen. That's called a seniority windfall at the expense of others, and arbitrators never allow it.

 

[madjack]

AAI Pilots: Seniority at any airline is based on DOH. @ your new airline (SWA) it is no different...no former AAI pilot with a DOH after a SWA pilot should, as a result of this acquisition, be more senior than that SWA pilot.

 

[redflyer65]

Agreed. The problem is that you guys don't seem to understand that it is a fair and equitable integration of seniority, not pay rates, not days off, not longevity, etc. The arbitrator will seek to implement a list in a way that, to the greatest extent possible, preserves your pre-merger career expectations. If you had an expectation of being a captain in two years, for example, he will do his best to make sure that that still happens. But bumping AirTran captains out of their seats or stapling a few hundred FOs? Sorry, but that just ain't going to happen. That's called a seniority windfall at the expense of others, and arbitrators never allow it.

If you honestly think this is where we are headed, then both of our futures will probably diverge. Absolutely not meant as a threat, it's just that SW pilots will not agree to anything close to that.

I hope the AAI MC has a little more insight than what you are throwing around. I'm still hopeful.

RF

 

[madjack]

PCL....not true...you cannot penalize the pilots from the stronger airline just because your upgrade time @ weaker, significantly lower paying airline was EXPECTED To be quicker.

P.S. There is a reason a significant number of AAI pilots had applications @ SWA, not the other way around.

 

[txav8r]

I think you and many others will be quite disappointed when this is all said and done.

Most of us already are.


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[redflyer65]

.



I think you and many others will be quite disappointed when this is all said and done.

It's interesting you say that, because my knowledge of the negotiations to this point, it would put the shoe on the other foot...but we'll know shortly.

 

[jonjuan]

PCL...THE WINDFALL CAN'T ALL GO TO AAI. YOU MUST SHARE THE GAINS WITH SWA PILOTS. That is fair and equitable...

dup........