New AT to SWA training plan out

[Lear70]

While this may be true, the new work rules will have a big play into getting the deal done.

That may well be true, but from a management perspective for us, let's take a look at what they want and what is going to happen moving forward for the next 3-5 years.

They don't like the cartel bidding and want rid of it. They don't seem to mind paying premium time to keep staffing down, but don't like the manipulating of the rules to exceed the max credit.

We're going to be overstaffed from 2015-2017 by as many as 450-500 people, dwindling slowly to break-even by 2017. Overstaffed means extra reserves which means more people to spread the extra flying to, thus minimizing the open time available at premium rates, thus eliminating the Cartel problem until staffing returns to normal.

They already have the relief they need from you to build red-eyes on with day flying, as well as other relief for international flying and re-defining the min day for those operations.

The only thing left is sick time issues and, arguably, you guys will want at least COLA raises in the next contract, but which would cost them more? Giving everyone a pay raise or the use of sick time that they don't like?

Honestly, I don't see an urgency to negotiate much before 2017. In fact, it may hurt them to give everyone raises right now as overstaffed as they're going to be, and the work rule changes they are looking for may well not matter as much being overstaffed until then.

I just don't see a rush from them to do anything. Could be wrong, but I think they like their costs where they are until the transition is done and staffing equalizes. Then again, I'm still new to your CBA and its costs, and there could be some other hidden reason they want to negotiate expeditiously. That said they don't seem to be in any hurry by the latest emails regarding slowing the pace of negotiations down...

 

[madjack]

"Could be wrong"

Lear, no way...as you said in another thread you are never wrong...

 

[FlyinGuy]

Lear,
I think you have wondered into territory that you do not know about. When it comes to premium time, the company is avoiding it at all costs. Yes that means they will spend more money to cover a trip to avoid paying premium. Instead of paying one pilot premium to fly a 3 day, they will split it up and pay 2-3 pilots straight time. Problem is the final trip pay is greater than what it would have cost to pay the one pilot premium. That is how they are currently operating.

As far as cartel's, the company could care less how a trip is covered. Pilots are the ones concerned about the few that are manipulating the "rules" to gain at the expense of their brothers.

Raises and sick calls are not comparable. Pay rates do not have a direct impact on sick calls. They claim that we have a higher sick rate than other airlines, so they are trying to deal with it by shining light and emphasizing coming to work.

As far as a new contract, we will continue to press the company to get it done.

 

[scoreboardII]

Pilot sick use is not an issue, that problem belongs to other work groups.

Lear, I don't understand your comment

Giving everyone a pay raise or the use of sick time that they don't like?

. Our sick time is contractual, if you need it, you use it, there is no "they don't like it" part of the equation.

FO sick rate: 6% (with mil trip drop included) Captain sick rate:8% (with almost no mil drop). Hows that compare to other airlines? Anyone? I don't know.

 

[ASADFW7]

Lear, you may be repeating what you have heard about SWA, and some of it is true but some of it is urban legend in how it impacts the company and pilot group. When you hear stuff, and repeat as you are in the know, with some of this information someone is snickering that you bought into so deeply. This isn't an insult, it is just an observation. Have a good day.

 

[Cruncher]

Flyin,

I think you have wondered into territory that you do not know about. When it comes to premium time, the company is avoiding it at all costs. Yes that means they will spend more money to cover a trip to avoid paying premium. Instead of paying one pilot premium to fly a 3 day, they will split it up and pay 2-3 pilots straight time. Problem is the final trip pay is greater than what it would have cost to pay the one pilot premium. That is how they are currently operating.

At the last round table with Chuck, this was brought up to him, he disagreed and challenged a pilot for proof. 10 minutes later, said challenged pilot printed out the trips showing how a "non-premium" trip was broke up and paid more in the long run. He was surprised, or is a good actor. Chuck said that'll stop (in the end the company wants to pay us as little as possible).

Though, I do think the company likes having guys spread out all over the system blocking 4 hours a day. Just think of the flexibility when the snow hits the fan?

 

[FlyinGuy]

Scheduling was given the directive to pay as little premium as possible. They are following orders. Will that change? Who knows.

 

[Lear70]

"Could be wrong"

Lear, no way...as you said in another thread you are never wrong...

Actually, that's one of my tag lines I've been saying for years. "Could be wrong... it's happened before."

Where did I say I was "Never wrong"? Direct quote stating EXACTLY that, please.

As to the others, you're exactly right, which is why I specifically said "Then again, I'm still new to your CBA..." I don't know what is going on, outside of the last information I heard which was SWA management putting negotiations on ice for now.

Scoreboard, what I meant was, which would cost the company more? Fixing some kind of perceived sick time or premium pay problem or some other work rule they want changed that will save them money? Or giving everyone a pay raise that would get the next contract passed?

With the company about to be overstaffed by several hundred people in the next couple years, if I were costing a contract, I'd see which would be the cheaper avenue and go with that. If it means stalling contract talks for 5-6 years while the staffing problem gets taken care of by attrition (which I agree with you 100% on how they plan to fix that, using retirements instead of growth), then that's what they'll do.

Mainly I'm responding to the idea that they want a new CBA so they would know their costs moving forward. I disagree with that, only insomuch as it is very likely cheaper to keep the labor rates where they are and kick the CBA down the road several years when they're about to be overstaffed than it is to have a new CBA now.

Unless you think they will win pay concessions? Whether it's a mix of work rules and pay that hides the concessions? In that case, I would agree that they'd want to get a new contract now. Otherwise, it just doesn't make sense.

 

[redflyer65]

You mean this part....


F. Base Protections
1. AirTran Pilots will be assigned to Atlanta for their initial vacancy bid at Southwest provided Atlanta vacancies are available.
2. If no Atlanta vacancies are available, newly transitioned AirTran Pilots will be awarded vacancy openings based on their Southwest seniority and normal Southwest vacancy rules.
3. Until September 27, 2020:
a. For Atlanta vacancies, those former AirTran Pilots in other Southwest domiciles with Atlanta as the higher vacancy bid in their current seat will be assigned to the same seat in Atlanta in seniority order prior to a Southwest Pilot being assigned to Atlanta. This protection is limited to 737 and 717 or similar narrow body aircraft types.
b. Former AirTran Pilots will not be displaced out of the Atlanta domicile by a Southwest pilot unless there is an overall reduction in the number of respective equipment seats system-wide

There was no way (as a SW pilot) that I could have bidded into Atlanta at all. Could they have downsized ATL? Maybe. But it was spelled out to be a 10 year ATL AAI fence. I flew with very senior SW CAs that were pissed about that language because they felt they should be able to go to ATL when they wanted. It wasn't written that way, and they were looking at an additional 10yrs to get there if that's what they bid.

All water under the bridge at this point. The MEC pushed for arbitration because in their mind, the money would be there anyway...so why not go for the brass ring (more seniority). It cost the line pilots at Airtran literally hundreds of thousands of dollars, probably more like several million. There was a huge monetary lose Lear, regardless of what your personal numbers are.

 

[Lear70]

Answered in another thread and off-topic anyway. We were talking about SWA negotiations and how there's no reason for mgmt to come to the table...

 

[funnyman12]

Why did SW hire 140 or so guys earlier this year? Block hours from last summer were down, yet they hired more pilots. Heck more guys below all of us is better, just never made much sense to me.

 

[texman]

Why did SW hire 140 or so guys earlier this year? Block hours from last summer were down, yet they hired more pilots. Heck more guys below all of us is better, just never made much sense to me.

It doesn't make sense to me either. Supposedly it was for the increase in vacation weeks by the pilot group becoming more SR. We have 150 plus retirements for 2013. No hiring for the year though. I heard it was because you guys are overstaffed per our model. So they need to offset the manning using our retirements. If true, then the SL10 upgrade projections were a lie.

 

[Ty Webb]

"Could be wrong"

Lear, no way...as you said in another thread you are never wrong...

If you can't counter a statement you don't like, insult the messenger. . . .

Genius . . . . pure genius! :laugh:

 

[Lear70]

It doesn't make sense to me either. Supposedly it was for the increase in vacation weeks by the pilot group becoming more SR. We have 150 plus retirements for 2013. No hiring for the year though. I heard it was because you guys are overstaffed per our model. So they need to offset the manning using our retirements. If true, then the SL10 upgrade projections were a lie.

We weren't overstaffed if we kept the 717's by more than 100 people, which could easily have been absorbed within our own 717 ranks just like it is now (low line values, high reserve coverage).

We were only overstaffed by about 50 or so on the 737 compared to your staffing ratio, which was MORE than offset by the retirements just in the first half of next year.

However, the number of 717's being sub-leased to Delta isn't offset on a purely hull-for hull basis by the retained 737 Classics plus deliveries. As a result, bringing over all our people is going to overstaff SWA by 450-500 people which, as i mentioned earlier, I agree with you that retirements are going to be used instead of growth to even out that number over the next 4-5 years.

That said, I disagree with you that it makes the SL10 upgrade numbers a lie.

The SL10 upgrade numbers were based on all our 737's coming across. They still are, and because our 737 CA's can't stay CA's and will be F/O's, your senior F/O's are still going to upgrade into those airplanes in the same staffing rate that they were promised in SL10.

Additionally, if nothing is done to offset the unplanned loss of our 717 Captain slots, you will also now be retaining the 737 Classics, which will yield you even MORE Captain seats.

With the Classics staying, you have to keep CA in those seats. With our 737's coming, you have to put CA's in those seats. You're going to get more upgrades than SL10 originally promised. That's just simple math of how many 737's are on property at the end of 12/31/2014.

Our overstaffing being brought over isn't going to come at the expense of CA seats, it's going to come at the expense of the F/O's, since we're ALL coming over as F/O's now. What is to be determined is whether or not it is considered a displacement for our people who were awarded 717 SWA TBD.

So basically your senior CA's were untouched with all this. Your mid-level
CA's won't feel it until after 2015 at which time enough people senior to them will have retired and they basically won't see any difference to what they were expecting to see in terms of seniority progression pre-acquisition. Your Junior CA's BEFORE the announcement get a seniority bump as all the senior F/O's there upgrade earlier than planned.

Your senior F/O's who upgrade through this will upgrade sooner and make an extra $250-500k than they expected, but will stay on reserve until basically 2020 in all likelihood as our senior CA's upgrade ahead of them after the 1/1/15 fence drop.

Your mid-level F/O's will stay about the same as your previously-senior F/O's upgrade, BUT our CA's come in above your previous-mid-level F/O's on each bases' seniority list and take the place of your senior F/O's.

Your junior F/O's will get bounced around from base to base as our CA's and senior F/O's come in above them and the normal monthly base size flexes up and down.

Your new-hire F/O's mixed with our mid-level, junior, and new-hire F/O's will form a very large reserve "plug" on the bottom for about a decade.

We've flow-charted the seniority progression out for the combined master seniority list and how it moves for the next 20 years and the above is, on a macro scale, about as accurate as it gets.

 

[roughneck]

What is to be determined is whether or not it is considered a displacement for our people who were awarded 717 SWA TBD.

A 717 displacement can't occur on the SWA side because we don't have a 717 to be displaced from. That displacement will occur on the AT side. The SWAPA contract doesn't apply to the AirTran side of the partition.