No growth at SW until 2016 now

[waveflyer]

Our first economic proposal from the company last week was ridiculous, and more of a managing of expectations. Included in that was unlimited near and far code share. It's been in the proposal since 2005 when Gary wanted to code share with Skywest bc of the Central Valley CA feed that can't be done well with a 73 according to their numbers.

It was happening when we bought air tran with Skywest. And we held the line.

Have we had it forced as heartily as you did after 9/11?

No, but it is being tested as hard as you were tested back in 1989.

You didn't hold the line then and eventually a Bankruptcy judge forced you into running half your domestic departures with them.

We are trying to learn from the past here at Swapa, something I'll admit is a bit foreign to dalpa considering your last vote.

You made the wrong choice bill. But thanks for putting the pressure on us by reloading that business model. Especially since we are getting more and more legacy like in our scheduling and less point to point. Now that we have verifiable hubs, I'm sure Gary wants feed even more.

 

[vetrider]

The other harmonica player ain't a whole lot better, although he did make me laugh when he tried to arrange a threesome with the two twenty-something FA's and completely ignored the gal that was his age and might have actually boned him. All on the van ride.

Face-palm.

Holy ******************** that's funny. I can picture the type, by now we've all seen it.

 

[PCL_128]

Have we had it forced as heartily as you did after 9/11?

No, but it is being tested as hard as you were tested back in 1989.

Not a fair comparison. You have the benefit of 25 years of hindsight to see what scope concessions will lead to. They didn't. They had a reasonable belief that allowing a few small airplanes would be beneficial to the operation without harming their own careers. In hindsight, that's not how it worked out, but it was a reasonable belief that someone could have at that time. Stop patting yourself on the back. You haven't earned it.

 

[BILL LUMBERG]

Our first economic proposal from the company last week was ridiculous, and more of a managing of expectations. Included in that was unlimited near and far code share. It's been in the proposal since 2005 when Gary wanted to code share with Skywest bc of the Central Valley CA feed that can't be done well with a 73 according to their numbers.

It was happening when we bought air tran with Skywest. And we held the line.

Have we had it forced as heartily as you did after 9/11?

No, but it is being tested as hard as you were tested back in 1989.

You didn't hold the line then and eventually a Bankruptcy judge forced you into running half your domestic departures with them.

We are trying to learn from the past here at Swapa, something I'll admit is a bit foreign to dalpa considering your last vote.

You made the wrong choice bill. But thanks for putting the pressure on us by reloading that business model. Especially since we are getting more and more legacy like in our scheduling and less point to point. Now that we have verifiable hubs, I'm sure Gary wants feed even more.

Once again, you talk "WE" like you play on a pro sports team. WE won, or WE lost....hopefully WE will get into the Super Bowl. You were buzzing around in an RJ that our scope relief provided. You should say thank you Bill.....

Don't get me started on who put pressure on who.....SWA was the model for all of our pension cuts and productivity changes in Bankruptcy. Like it or not, your model was what management wanted.....no pensions, higher productivity, no meals, pay for training....the list goes on and on.

 

[madjack]

No meals....oh my gosh, that's tragic....

 

[redflyer65]

Tens of thousands of jobs outsourced from Delta and Bill is talking about crew meals and how we should thank him. Pretty interesting.

 

[madjack]

The RJ world is going to change as the minimums have risen and the legacies begin a big generational retirement wave...

 

[waveflyer]

Pcl, I'm starting to think you're not as smart as I thought, since I literally said "trying to learn from the past..." In my post.
Just a lemming. Only difference between you and the kool aid pilots here is that you drink alpa flavored. (Or guzzle it I guess)

And I absolutely do pat Swapa on the back for their stance on outsourcing. And my main critique of alpa and DALPA in particular is how often (and recent) they vote to outsource-

But let's not pretend that one couldn't have had the foresight back in '89 with comair. I know you're young, but it was plenty controversial at the time and many many pilots told DALPA what it could lead to.

 

[waveflyer]

Bill, you really want to go round and round again?

That dog don't hunt man.

The reason I use such a particular word to describe you ( SELLOUTS), is bc you think grown men signing a contract that they have to live under is wrong, while you signing a contract that creates a whipsaw market OTHER pilots have to live under is an appropriate response to that competitive pressure.

 

[waveflyer]

The RJ world is going to change as the minimums have risen and the legacies begin a big generational retirement wave...

I agree, which is why DALPA signing off on bigger airplanes (that require less pilots at the moment) was so colossally dumb. Let the RJ die on it's own. Fly the damn RJ-900 yourself if delta wants to fly it.

And all that certainly doesn't make it wise for us to relieve code share MJ.
RJs are not close to dead yet
Not saying you were saying that, just saying.

 

[Dan Roman]

Not a fair comparison. You have the benefit of 25 years of hindsight to see what scope concessions will lead to. They didn't. They had a reasonable belief that allowing a few small airplanes would be beneficial to the operation without harming their own careers. In hindsight, that's not how it worked out, but it was a reasonable belief that someone could have at that time. Stop patting yourself on the back. You haven't earned it.

Wave, read this again. It's a fair observation. The whole controversy over feed vs jobs is not as cut and dry as you make it. RJ's do create mainline jobs by providing feed. Yes it's gone too far, but no one could have forecasted what was ahead when that cat got let out of the bag (9/11, bankruptcies and economy crashing).
As far as SWAPA goes, I have nothing against independent unions, but SWAPA has simply been a follower, not a leader. They were able to build on the foundation that was built by ALPA. Their success has been a result of dealing with a benevolent management team and SWA's business plan of filling the LCC niche when there was room to grow, not through being better than ALPA

 

[FlyinGuy]

Some of you Pro-ALPAzombies can't see the forest for the trees. ALPA has done some things right, but don't forget that many pilots have lived through their BS.

 

[Dan Roman]

Some of you Pro-ALPAzombies can't see the forest for the trees. ALPA has done some things right, but don't forget that many pilots have lived through their BS.

Obviously if you need to resort to name calling you have a weak arguement. Sorry about whatever happened to you, we all work in very volatile industry that has seen some pretty crappy management teams. I don't know any carrier that was destroyed by ALPA, but ALPA pilots have done a lot better than they would have had they been non union. But ALPA can't single handedly save a carrier that is spirally down the drain, just reduce the damages as much as possible.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Wave, read this again. It's a fair observation. The whole controversy over feed vs jobs is not as cut and dry as you make it. RJ's do create mainline jobs by providing feed. Yes it's gone too far, but no one could have forecasted what was ahead when that cat got let out of the bag (9/11, bankruptcies and economy crashing).
As far as SWAPA goes, I have nothing against independent unions, but SWAPA has simply been a follower, not a leader. They were able to build on the foundation that was built by ALPA. Their success has been a result of dealing with a benevolent management team and SWA's business plan of filling the LCC niche when there was room to grow, not through being better than ALPA

Dan, I don't think anyone is saying that ALPA hasn't done anything for the industry; indeed they have. However, they are not the be-all, end-all that you and others make them out to be.

The reason some of us like having our own independent union should be obvious. First and foremost is that every dollar spent, and every effort expended, is for our own members first. Period. Every time. That's certainly not true with a national union. A national union with competing locals has to balance the needs and wants of different chapters, when they find that their interests compete against each other. That means that your money and union might not have your best interest in mind when decisions between two ALPA carriers are made. ALPA regional carriers vs. ALPA mainline in the codeshare situation comes first to mind. I'm sure others can give other examples.

Plus you have the added overhead and drag of another, huge bureaucratic layer, far removed from your concerns. More money.

You pretend again that you're being "non-partisan," but once again, you resort to slams on anything Southwest. I've never said that SWAPA was better than ALPA (other than for myself and other Southwest pilots), but you can't help slamming SWAPA ("a follower, not a leader." Our success was "built on ALPA.") In case you hadn't noticed, Dan, ALL airline labor unions feed off each other. That's how it works. We all pull each other up--a rising tide floats all boats, as it were. How many ALPA carriers used SWAPA's CBA as leverage in trying to regain their losses after 9/11 and bankruptcy contracts? Uh... that would be most if not all of them, Dan. In those cases, Dan, using your analogy, ALPA was rebuilding its "crumbled" foundation on the newer, but more solid SWAPA foundation. Should they be thanking us now, like you seem to think we should kowtow to ALPA?

You like ALPA? Good for you. However, it's not perfect, it's not the only or necessarily the best answer, and it's definitely not right for everyone. Larger airlines with their own independent union are generally more satisfied with that. Why do you have such a problem with that?

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

Lee Moak says it best: "'Independent union' is an oxymoron."

You guys are going to get your asses handed to you in Section 6, and it's largely because you refuse to be a part of the organization that has the experience in dealing with the kind of management that you now have. You'll learn. But the lessons will have a price.