Southwest CEO: AirTran Deal 'Imperative' To Counter Fuel Spike

[roughneck]

SWAPA, ALPA nor the SLI has anything to do with the DOCC . The DOCC will happen as soon as the DOJ and stock holders have given their approval. After that it is a done deal and that will happen long before the SLI has been worked out. Most likely mid May

Nothing is done after DOCC other than SWA owning AirTran and its assets. You need to reread the sentence in your contract directly following the 18 month provision if you think you are guaranteed to be operationally merged with SWA. Your assets are on the chopping block directly after DOCC if Gary decides. You allowed that when you voted in the recent contract. I suggest you go read it. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[27 driver]

Nothing is done after DOCC other than SWA owning AirTran and its assets. You need to reread the sentence in your contract directly following the 18 month provision if you think you are guaranteed to be operationally merged with SWA. Your assets are on the chopping block directly after DOCC if Gary decides. You allowed that when you voted in the recent contract. I suggest you go read it. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Are you so insecure that you have to turn every post into my airline is bigger and better than yours. We get it. Somehow you turn every post into a some type of threat. All he was trying to point out is that nobody but the shareholders and the govt have any say in DOCC. Not SWAPA or ALPA. What happens after is anybody's guess. Give it a rest already. You're not scaring anyone.

 

[Lear70]

Nothing is done after DOCC other than SWA owning AirTran and its assets. You need to reread the sentence in your contract directly following the 18 month provision if you think you are guaranteed to be operationally merged with SWA. Your assets are on the chopping block directly after DOCC if Gary decides. You allowed that when you voted in the recent contract. I suggest you go read it. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Nobody's talking about "biting the hand that feeds you". We're talking about simply assuring a FAIR seniority list integration.

Fair does NOT equal a staple.

As for what you're reading in 1.E.2, the sentence that follows it reads:

Nothing in this Paragraph E shall prevent the Company from disposing of its interest in the other air carrier prior to the merger of flight operations.

Quite simply,,, you're reading it wrong. You have to go back to DEFINITIONS. The Company is AirTran. In legalese, wherever it says "the Company", insert the word "AirTran". That means the above section, in legal speak, would read:

"Nothing in this Paragraph E shall prevent AirTran from disposing of its interest in the other air carrier prior to the merger of flight operations."

It was designed to allow AirTran to purchase another airline (or a controlling interest in another airline) and sell that airline (or its controlling interest) PRIOR to merging the groups. That one sentence you're referring to quite simply doesn't apply in the event WE are purchased, NOR does it negate the rest of that paragraph, it was added by AirTran management to give them flexibility to buy another airline and sell it if they wanted. It's just that simple.

Seriously though, the fear-mongering needs to stop and people just need to let the process work. It'll be OK... I promise. Life will go on, it always does.

 

[Tweet-a-Lishus]

I'm curious Lear, you say fair doesn't equal a staple. Do you think relative does?

 

[Lear70]

I'm curious Lear, you say fair doesn't equal a staple. Do you think relative does?

Well, not that we're supposed to talk about expectations, but since I already threw the "no staple" comment out there repeatedly AND, since I've already said once before that a true relative seniority solution starting at our respective #1 guys and going down isn't fair in my opinion (our #1 guy just junior to your #1 guy and so on), and I'm not going back and deleting comments, I guess I can answer your question (since I already said it once a few months ago before we were told to not discuss specifics).



I have faith that our committees will work it out.

 

[On Your Six]

I'm curious Lear, you say fair doesn't equal a staple. Do you think relative does?

That is up to an arbitrator or group of arbitrators. They will look over the testimony from your lawyers, read documents, and give an award. If you don't like the result from the nuetral party, then you have someone to blame, THEM. It won't be up to you or the Airtran pilots.


OYS

 

[On Your Six]

Well, not that we're supposed to talk about expectations, but since I already threw the "no staple" comment out there repeatedly AND, since I've already said once before that a true relative seniority solution starting at our respective #1 guys and going down isn't fair in my opinion (our #1 guy just junior to your #1 guy and so on), and I'm not going back and deleting comments, I guess I can answer your question (since I already said it once a few months ago before we were told to not discuss specifics).



I have faith that our committees will work it out.

Great answer, but even that is unlikey. If you want true fairness, you will hand it over to people that have nothing to gain in any outcome, ie an arbitrator(s). They will look at everything fairly, and rendor a fair decision based on the facts. Good luck to all of you.


OYS

 

[Roomwithaview]

Oys

Great answer, but even that is unlikey. If you want true fairness, you will hand it over to people that have nothing to gain in any outcome, ie an arbitrator(s). They will look at everything fairly, and rendor a fair decision based on the facts. Good luck to all of you.
OYS

I had to laugh at the naivety of this post until I was made aware of your experience level, or lack there of. Honestly, for someone who has no problem piping in on anything and everything as the self appointed know-it-all, I would've thought you a little more learned.

You have obviously never been through negotiations, mediation or arbitration. There is a reason the process goes just like that. If it were as smart and as simple as you say then why aren't both sides (or one or the other for that matter) just folding up their tents and drafting their final language for "Binding Arbitration"

Get back to me on that one.

:smash: <----Me
:cartman: <-----You

gawd this is fun!