New AT to SWA training plan out

[Cruncher]

I don't see where SWA is gaining by subleasing the 717

The operating costs being very similar might be a factor, when you consider the revenue potential (122 seats versus 143). Philosophically, we are going to larger airplanes, not smaller. 143 seats, -800s, ..., the 717 is like leasing a fleet of -500s.

However, one benefit for the SWA Master list (considering the transition bid results), subleasing 52 * B717 will more or less "normalize" the seniority list on 1/1/15. That is, on 1/1/15, those senior enough (≤50%) to hold a Captain seat will, those unable to hold a Captain seat will be bumped from the B717, assuming the seat removal occurs in reverse seniority.

If the B717 were all still on property on 1/1/15, we'd have close to 300 former AT pilots in the left seat, where the bottom B717 CA would be junior to over a 1400 former SWA FOs.

All considering no pilot growth.

Maybe, this was a small part of their plan to keep training costs down.

I do see a fair amount of training after 1/1/15, when former senior AT guys bid back to Captain, displacing former SWA guys back to the right seat. But who knows, maybe some of those guys will like the top bids, vacation, premium OT, .... and will stay as FOs.

IMO, the company really looked at the costs associated with operating a multiple aircraft fleet and it worried them.

 

[Bill Nelson]

"do see a fair amount of training after 1/1/15, when former senior AT guys bid back to Captain, displacing former SWA guys back to the right seat."

It doesn't work like that. They won't bump anyone out of their seat they will remain FO's until there is a captain vacancy for them to fill.

 

[NuGuy]

FWIW, determining "intent" is very much a part of the arbitration process.

Both sides at any table take detailed "negotiator's notes", which includes the specific nature of why certain items were crafted or written the way they were.

These notes become evidence for the arbitrator...it is essentially the first thing they ask for.. In many cases, these notes convey a meaning that is not reflected in the actual contract language.

Nu

 

[NuGuy]

FWIW, determining "intent" is very much a part of the arbitration process.

Both sides at any table take detailed "negotiator's notes", which includes the specific nature of why certain items were crafted or written the way they were.

These notes become evidence for the arbitrator...it is essentially what they ask fr firstr. In many cases, these notes convey a meaning or intent that is not reflected in the actual contract language.

Nu

 

[madjack]

"These notes become evidence for the arbitrator...it is essentially the first thing they ask for.. In many cases, these notes convey a meaning that is not reflected in the actual contract language."

Well that is interesting...

 

[redflyer65]

I just 'made some notes' and dated them 5/14/2011. I'll see if the arbitor will want them since it's the first thing he will ask for. I believe the written argeement will carry a ton of evidence that will be hard for him to overule. A few notes from the AAI side will most likely not cross the very high threshold of making a change. Going to be interesting to watch, no matter how it turns out.

 

[madjack]

"A few notes from the AAI side will most likely not cross the very high threshold of making a change"

Therein lies the argument...AAI was verbally promised 717 CP seats post 2015, those seats are now going to DAL, but the pilots are now coming to SWA...I haven't seen anything but would not be surprised if they are asking for a carve out 88 SWA 737s worth of CP seats (440ish) post 1/2015 or pay protection (at SWA CP rates)...

A sympathetic arbitrator could really put a put a fly in the ointment for this integration...

 

[NuGuy]

I just 'made some notes' and dated them 5/14/2011. I'll see if the arbitor will want them since it's the first thing he will ask for. I believe the written argeement will carry a ton of evidence that will be hard for him to overule. A few notes from the AAI side will most likely not cross the very high threshold of making a change. Going to be interesting to watch, no matter how it turns out.

Clearly you have never been close to the mechanics as to how contracts or agreements at this level are negotiated, or have ever been part of an arbitration.

We're not about a few scribbles on a napkin. Try reams and boxes of documents that have legal standing, the same as your doctor's notes that he has transcribed after a visit.

Remember, arbitration favors those with the best documentation, and unclear or ambiguous language is usually decided in favor of the side that didn't write it. Remember those notes? They contain information as to who wrote what language in the agreement. As the AT side has been down this road before, and had good legal counsel. I guarantee you those notes are extremely detailed, down to who said what, on what date and time. Even the smallest details are recorded.

I've seen arbitrations over seemingly CLEAR language, black and white, guaranteed win, lost on the intent as presented by the negotiator's notes. You'd best give a call to your NC or Contract Administrator if you think it's just about what's in the print of any agreement.

Nu

 

[redflyer65]

Good luck with that Nu. I don't need to call anyone.

Honestly, I don't blame the AAI guys for doing it. I would too if the shoe was on the other foot. I think it's kind of a hail Mary, but it's worth a shot.

 

[Lear70]

The operating costs being very similar might be a factor, when you consider the revenue potential (122 seats versus 143). Philosophically, we are going to larger airplanes, not smaller. 143 seats, -800s, ..., the 717 is like leasing a fleet of -500s.

Let's just say that it's VERY cost effective for SWA to sub-lease those 717's. I've seen some of the numbers, and although I'm still bound to a confidentiality agreement for money-specific issues, I can tell you that it's better for the company financially this way (which management has also said, otherwise they wouldn't have done it, but knowing some of the details I can understand the "why" of the issue).

However, knowing enough of the broad financials behind it, I can say that pay protecting the Captains would still leave Southwest WELL into positive cash territory for the 717 deal.

However, one benefit for the SWA Master list (considering the transition bid results), subleasing 52 * B717 will more or less "normalize" the seniority list on 1/1/15. That is, on 1/1/15, those senior enough (≤50%) to hold a Captain seat will, those unable to hold a Captain seat will be bumped from the B717, assuming the seat removal occurs in reverse seniority.

Incorrect. On 1/1/15, on the MASTER Southwest seniority list, with ALL the previous AAI pilots on it, there will be 373 previous AAI pilots who are F/O's who have the seniority to hold CA slots but will be precluded from such by the 1/1/15 "no AAI 737 CA" provision.

The seniority list will not "normalize" as you put it, until likely well close to 2017, primarily through attrition, and secondarily with new aircraft deliveries, depending of course on the -300 retirements.

If the B717 were all still on property on 1/1/15, we'd have close to 300 former AT pilots in the left seat, where the bottom B717 CA would be junior to over a 1400 former SWA FOs.

No, actually, you'd have closer to 550 AAI pilots in the left seat of the 717, almost 200 of which would be holding it out-of-seniority. Remember, the list was roughly a 6.5:1 ratio, give or take, so yes, almost 200 pilots would be ratio'd in with around 1,300 SWA pilots.

Maybe, this was a small part of their plan to keep training costs down.

As has been mentioned, by doing this, and AAI ALPA not giving them relief on the training issues, it's going to cost ADDITIONAL millions of $$$ in training costs, having to run several hundred 737 pilots back through 717 training to honor the flush bid, the two months for each pilot who will come out of the system to train, drawing full pay during training, plus hotels, plus per diem, plus the sim costs from Alteon, etc. Then they'll have to run them through full initial at SWA again when they transition.

That kind of money, however, is small potatoes compared to the money savings on the 717 deal with Delta, and obviously wasn't even enough for us to use as a carrot to get something for the way it negatively impacted us.