New 1500 hour rule first affected

[General Lee]

Yet you cannot convince him that he has NO life. Sad.

And you still don't have a pay raise, and likely won't for awhile. You lose.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

It takes a horrible toll on your body. But the way things are set up at the legacies, you have to fly the widebody to get the higher pay. Doing a 2 and a half day trip at SW within the same time zone is apples and oranges to the walking dead 60+ year old guys that can't turn that many time zones anymore.

Uhhhhhh what? So, being senior on a narrowbody means you can't make more than a widebody FO? Huh? Red, if you are senior in category, you can do many things, like swapping for higher paying trips, getting greenslips (double pay on days off), etc. You don't have any idea what you are talking about. And, I get more sleep on the longer trips, and better layovers, while taking a 3 hour paid nap each direction. What is your experience with long haul? Zip? Yeah, thought so. Another BS post by you. At least at the majors you have options to your type of flying. You don't.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[waveflyer]

Yay for you GL - and I'd still take the average domestic SWA trip over your domestic trips- though I'd love to do the long haul flying you got for a little while- I've done enough traveling to know I wouldn't want to do that op forever. Can that be cool and ok and stay on topic nerd?

Not sure you've even tried to make a comment on the 1500 hour rule

 

[redflyer65]

No, it's really funny watching you justify your ridiculous agreement with the cheaper AT guys flying the same plane for less. And, you have no answer for it, well, accept for "thanks GK for doing that, and we owe you one...." Ridiculous!


Bye Bye---General Lee

Are you seriously trying to equate a merger agreement between two carriers (that ends in 16 months) to your continued outsourcing over the past 20 years AND counting? Joint ventures, codeshare and 1000 RJs. Really?

Those two aren't even in the same realm and you know it. But you try the best you can with what little debate you have.....which is really nothing.

Re-read SWAdudes post. It pretty much lays out your non-argument.

 

[Flopgut]

30,000 foot view: I don't think the legacy outsource debate can not include a discussion of deregulation*. Additionally it's obvious the SWA posters here don't understand the significant recent changes in scope the most recent contracts at DAL and UAL have made. Yeah, there is still a lot of outsourcing, but these contracts both might prove to have turned the corner toward better scope. To the point of the thread, the 1500 rule causes a shortage of pilots at certain regionals, the flying comes right back to the legacy.

*If SWA had been a flash in the pan, deregulation would be considered a failure. Its the one airline ever body points to as deregulation's success. (even the guy who wrote it claims that as the truth) Problem is that success can be attributed directly to a non market competitive advantage at Love Field. Bottom line, SWA has the ingredients they need handed to them and the legacies have to endure the full brunt of every kind of market reality. If they were in the same market reality crosshairs that legacies like DAL are, it's doubtful SWA scope would look like it does now.

It's also interesting to see the same SWA guys swarm GL like they are here. Do you guys have a phone tree or something?! The instant a solid argument is made that does not flatter SWA the same guys get on here and get real chippy.

 

[SWA Bubba]

No, it's really funny watching you justify your ridiculous agreement with the cheaper AT guys flying the same plane for less. And, you have no answer for it, well, accept for "thanks GK for doing that, and we owe you one...." Ridiculous!


Bye Bye---General Lee

Hey General Lee!

(I made that big in the hopes that you would actually see it, since it seems you have a reading/seeing/comprehension problem of some sort).

Yo, knucklehead. I just posted the "answer for it" a page or two back (post 58 on page 4 of this thread, as well as numerous other times). Do you actually read anything that anyone else posts, or do you just have some sort of macro you key in to repeat idiotic anti-SWA rants?

And as far as "thanks GK for doing that, and we owe you one," this is just another example of General Lee's degenerative brain disease. Nobody at either AT or SW is thanking Gary for buying another carrier. Nobody. Just ask any of them. There's any number of people on this forum alone, from both Southwest and AirTran, who will explain that to you. Gary bought AirTran as a business decision to satisfy his shareholders, not his employees.

As far as SWAPA "owing him" anything, that's your own personal invention. We owe him nothing. We'll give no concessions on this section six. We've already done our part to help the bottom line. We did it through rapid agreements to help facilitate the acquisition, fly near-international, and fly somewhat larger planes. All the things he said he needed to grow the company. The bottom line is, he owes US.

The fact that you alone, General Lee, keep repeating the idiotic nonsense that a pilot group will give concessions in an ongoing negotiation with a company that's making money, says more about YOU than it does about anyone else. Listen to yourself-- you're predicting--moreover, you're gleefully hoping--that another pilot group loses contract ground and money in this environment. Even though no other person in the world thinks it's going to happen. And more importantly, even though that would hurt every airline pilot out there, you still WANT it to happen. What kind of putz does that make you?

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

30,000 foot view: I don't think the legacy outsource debate can not include a discussion of deregulation*. Additionally it's obvious the SWA posters here don't understand the significant recent changes in scope the most recent contracts at DAL and UAL have made. Yeah, there is still a lot of outsourcing, but these contracts both might prove to have turned the corner toward better scope. To the point of the thread, the 1500 rule causes a shortage of pilots at certain regionals, the flying comes right back to the legacy.

I certainly hope what you said above comes true.

*If SWA had been a flash in the pan, deregulation would be considered a failure. Its the one airline ever body points to as deregulation's success. (even the guy who wrote it claims that as the truth) Problem is that success can be attributed directly to a non market competitive advantage at Love Field. Bottom line, SWA has the ingredients they need handed to them and the legacies have to endure the full brunt of every kind of market reality.

Well, this part is complete crap. "[N]on market competitive advantage at Love Field"? Really? Any airline could have come to Love Field and flown to any old damn place, or for that matter, every damn place, that we were allowed to. The fact is, many airlines, including yours, Flopgut, have done exactly that.

"SWA has the ingredients they needed handed to them"? Well, I suppose that if by "ingredients" you mean one frivolous lawsuit after another, and then after they all failed, finally having your stooge Congressman insert a specifically anti-SWA law into the books to directly hobble us, then I suppose we have had a lot of things "handed to us." Personally, I think we would have preferred to have done without, however. We've literally had to fight for everything we've done or tried to do.

If they were in the same market reality crosshairs that legacies like DAL are, it's doubtful SWA scope would look like it does now.

Would you like to attempt to actually back this statement up? Or were you just going to throw it in randomly? The fact is that we bear the same market realities as every other airline. Plus, we've been subject to attacks (including illegal ones) to kill us. Plus, we alone have been subject to a law designed specifically to hurt us, and to shield another airline from actually having to compete in the market place.

And our business model has always been one aircraft type. How can you possibly infer a difference in scope if circumstances had been any different? Hell, if not for wasting money to defend against frivolous legal attacks, we might have been bigger and stronger sooner.

It's also interesting to see the same SWA guys swarm GL like they are here. Do you guys have a phone tree or something?! The instant a solid argument is made that does not flatter SWA the same guys get on here and get real chippy.

No phone tree at all. Just reading the forum and responding to BS. And it's not just Southwest guys who call out General Lee, in case you hadn't noticed. It's nearly everybody. And, I'm sorry, what exact "solid argument" did General Lee make? All I saw were stale jokes and platitudes. Just because you hate Southwest Flopgut, doesn't make other people's absurd anti-SW rants into "solid" anything, other than perhaps solid waste (if you know what I mean!).

Bubba

 

[HowardBorden]

Problem is that success can be attributed directly to a non market competitive advantage at Love Field. Bottom line, SWA has the ingredients they need handed to them and the legacies have to endure the full brunt of every kind of market reality.

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, so long as Love Field remained open as an airport, the City of Dallas could not preclude Southwest from operating from the field, but it in no way excluded others from operating there.

Any and all carriers were and are free to operate at DAL as long as they choose to operate within the constraints of the Wright Amendment. Passenger service on regular mid-sized and large aircraft can be provided from Love Field only to locations within Texas and the four neighboring US states: Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. Later modified to include Alabama, Kansas and Mississippi and Missouri. Longhaul service to other states is permissible only on commuter aircraft with no more capacity than 56 passengers.

 

[Tripower455]

I'd rather pay to work at Southwest over Delta any day.

I agree. Good thing we didn't have to pay to be here!

 

[dicko]

That is the irony of Great Lakes-

Lakes sells experience to pilots with their low wages and looking at where they fly, I'm sure they get that experience in droves- I know how much I value my no autopilot turboprop experience- I never agreed with what my 1900 carrier paid, much less lakes- but it's a lot better than having pilots jump right into a -900 out of flight school.

I agree. I think that sort of flying is a good apprenticeship for an airline pilot. With the exception of the pay. Eight or nine legs a day with no autopilot in a variety of weather. Often with no flight director. It would probably cripple me now.

If they forced them to fly the J32, crawl uphill in the snow through broken glass, it would be perfect. Jet Pig Society.