Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Question for SWAPA

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I'm not counting on any net growth for quite awhile either, we on the SW side have been sold that bill of goods before. And so far, it hasn't panned out.

RF
 
If this does not go out for a vote isn't there still time to change things?


Thre's nothing left for either side to give. There's no point in negotiating with each other, anymore. The ONLY thing that can change is GK putting up some cash to make it easier. I don't expect this to happen. Non-agreement means arbitration, plain and simple.

shootr
 
That's not *ENTIRELY* correct.

It's the protection language to guarantee the Agreement In Principle that's the sticky point at the moment. If those protections aren't adequate, it would invalidate the Agreement-In-Principle and our MEC would have every right to kill it. In that event I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there were further meetings to try to remedy that language.

Is there more to give on either side of the table FROM THE AIP? You may be right that there's not, but the main issue right now is the protections.

Maybe it would be fixable, maybe it wouldn't, but every single protection item on that AIP will have to be realized in order for this pilot group to take that big of a hit on their seniority and even then, I may be off on the percentage this will pass by, it will likely be a lot less than the 85/15 I initially thought, due to the details that came out in SL9.
 
Now that details are crawling out such as if the MEC says no then they can return to the negotiating bunker to resolve unclear items, a lot of my friends and I want them to say no. Unless we are mistaken, the only way they get to polish this stuff is for them to say NO. If they say yes then there is no more time and it goes to the arbitrator.

Uncertainty is expensive and some of us think GK would rather negotiate vs leaving things in the hands of an arbitrator.

If GK wants to park all 717's or all of us then he will regardless of how we vote if it makes SWA money. Why he doesn't pay off his senior FO's is odd. Maybe he would if things can be negotiated vs arbitrated.

Back to rehydrating and reading.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top