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

Southwest looking to contain costs - article

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
Ah yes, the gun to the head analogy. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it you that has claimed all along that the supposed threats were baseless and empty? You said all along there were no bullets for the fictitious gun so how can that be threatening?

What I believe isn't what the vast majority of AirTran pilots believed. They were scared $hitless. I maintain to this day that Gary was simply engaged in normal bargaining behavior. Sadly, most pilots know little about bargaining, and when they get a threatening letter from a CEO, they don't react rationally.
 
What I believe isn't what the vast majority of AirTran pilots believed. They were scared $hitless. I maintain to this day that Gary was simply engaged in normal bargaining behavior. Sadly, most pilots know little about bargaining, and when they get a threatening letter from a CEO, they don't react rationally.

Sorry, I forgot how much more rational you are than everyone else.
 
Sorry, I forgot how much more rational you are than everyone else.

I don't think he comes across like that. He does come across as having a more insightful and accurate perspective than you. That's not a slam, clearly PCL was involved with the process, you are more of a spectator. Which is the case often in any of these kind of deals. There are always pilots that contribute a lot of time and energy towards representing their fellow pilots, and then their is the rest that second guess them and base their opinions on emotion rather than reality. Again, not slamming you personally, that's simply the nature of ALL pilot negotiations.
 
You're either a troll or completely clueless. Hold a gun to someone's head and you can get them to vote for anything.

Gun?
Wasn't the threat to just operate you separately and not integrate. Why would that scare any air tran pilot if things are so good there?
 
Well, this post sure belies your oft-claimed "neutrality," now doesn't it, Dan?

Airline acquisitions and mergers (as well as those of other industries) are a fact of life. Sometimes they're a product of necessity, sometimes a vehicle for growth and change, sometimes a competition-based transaction, and most of the time, some combination of all these and more. But I don't know of any (other than those orchestrated by Lorenzo) where the goal, or at least the known outcome, was company liquidation and employee dismissal, i.e. destroying people's careers and livelihoods.

Southwest did not "destroy" PCL's airline career, in any way, shape or form. For you to imply is just another example of baiting. Did his career expectations change? Absolutely, along with everyone else at the combined company. In fact, you could make the argument that every employee of every company has their career expectations change with every major decision undertaken by their management. Be that a growth spurt, a growth freeze, strategic planning, or even a new contract with different terms, for that matter.

The overwhelming majority of FOs at AirTran see the transaction as a positive thing for them. They got large pay raises, better working conditions, and work for a more stable company. PCL was a junior FO at AirTran. Now he'll be a somewhat more junior FO at Southwest (if he comes over, that is), but with all the positive benefits I listed. Hell, with all the newhires this year, he would probably be somewhere near exactly the same seniority at Southwest that he was at AirTran, with the extra money and stability. And that's a career "destroyed" in your eyes, Dan? Just because PCL is mad for other reasons doesn't translate into a "corporate entity" destroying any individual or his career. No matter how much PCL claims. And no matter how much you want it to be true, to pursue your anti-SWA agenda.

And more importantly, the only reason that PCL is actually indignant is that his union efforts amounted to exactly nothing. Actually, they amounted to less than nothing. He may have had his union career "destroyed," but his airline career, assuming he ever actually wanted one in the first place, was not. He could have just as good if not better of an airline career at Southwest as he did at AirTran. You and he can pretend it's not true, but it most assuredly is. He's probably embarrassed that he overplayed his hand in the negotiations, and now a lot of his own former constituent pilots dislike him. He was personally made to look foolish and arrogant for his union-related actions, and he is personally named as contributor to the abject failure of leadership alleged in the ongoing lawsuit against ALPA by AirTran pilots. So I can see why he might be reluctant to come over to Southwest. Everyone knows who he is and what he has done. But that's okay; I suspect he really didn't want to be an airline pilot anyway, so much as he wanted to be some sort of national level George Meany-wannabe.

Accordingly, you could not be more wrong, Dan. Neither Southwest Airlines, AirTran Airways, Gary Kelly, Bob Fornaro, or either of both airlines' boards who approved this acquisition, did anything to "destroy" PCL's airline career. I know you like to pretend your neutrality, but when you make asinine posts like this, you just show yourself as another agitator, trying to fan the flames. Good God, man, just sack up and admit your blatant partisanship. It's pretty obvious to the rest of us.

Bubba

Your balanced tone, does not speak the truth. "The vast majority" of AirTran Fo's does not see the transaction as positive. They welcome the pay raise, but also dread the seniority loss. Most of them will have to move and the vast majority will never upgrade or do so in their last year or two. No Bubba, the vast majority of Fo's is not happy and thinks we got unfairly integrated. We feel that because you think that Southwest is so much better: AirTran pilots deserved to join only at the bottom, that no captain was worthy of retaining his seat. That most Fo's since they got a payraise, should see their career limited to just being an Fo; heck a bunch of captain's too since they will never upgrade again...
Isn't it closer to the truth that "the vast majority" of SW pilots would much rather see every airtran guy at the bottom of the list? Isn't it true that when the MEC turned down the first offer, management added the innuendo of "if" we integrate to almost every communication? The plan B? Isn't it true that hundreds of RSW pilots rallied in Dallas in support of non integrating the pilots? (so I was told by a dozen of you) Isn't it true that every month for the past year, every upgrade at Southwest came on the back of a downgraded AirTran Captain? SW has not grown one airplane since they bought us, in fact there is less metal on property this year.
If the vast majority of FO's think that this was a good transaction, how come we don't see any of them here on FI supporting your case?
I do know 1 by the way... Great guy. However the left seat was not for him. Tried and failed twice. Did it on the third try but downgraded himself after 8 months. It just wasn't for him. He did feel that the transaction was great personally.
This is also a fact gentlemen, everyday that passes FAT guys know more about SW than RSW guys will ever know about AirTran. Every day we get disappointed by something. Everyday we have more truth in our hands while RSW guys keep lingering in what they think but not necessarily is the truth. To me SW is a shadow of what I used to think it was. Just lots of marketing and hot air to the employees. By the way, while you are reading this, the first SLI was crap. It is not that it wasn't enough. IS that it was wrong. -A Trap if you will. This has always been about seniority. That 86% of yes voters, did it with such indignation. And I don't think any amount of cool-aid will make them forget. While we feel that we lost so much, you ask "what did I get".
Here is what I think, for SouthWest to be successful in the future, it may have to start looking more and more like the Airtran of 3 years ago.

Sorry for the long post, I don't do it often.
 
I don't think he comes across like that. He does come across as having a more insightful and accurate perspective than you. That's not a slam, clearly PCL was involved with the process, you are more of a spectator. Which is the case often in any of these kind of deals. There are always pilots that contribute a lot of time and energy towards representing their fellow pilots, and then their is the rest that second guess them and base their opinions on emotion rather than reality. Again, not slamming you personally, that's simply the nature of ALL pilot negotiations.

Sorry Dan, that's not an accurate perspective.

I have long agreed with PCL on this particular piece of the puzzle. I agree that SWA was simply involved in negotiating tactics in their dealings with AirTran. I know this because I know the SWA contract. There is absolutely zero provisions in our agreement to allow SWA to operate another airline with pilots not on the SWA seniority list. SWAPA maintains the absolutely tightest scope language in the industry. That fact alone completely nullifies any threats, real or otherwise, delivered by management. The real difference is the fact that I don't try and convince people that I am smarter than them on this subject. I know our contract and I know what is accepted and what is not. Operating AirTran as a separate entity was simply not allowed. Of course contracts can be altered but the empirical evidence at the time did not in any way shape or form support managements assertions about operating AT separately.

And for the record, PCL has denied or at least dodged the question relating to his position within the leadership group at AT ALPA. When it suits him to present the image that he is part of the inner circle, he promotes that scenario, however whenever he chooses to dodge any culpability for his actions relating to the SLI, he reverts to the "this is an anonymous web board" mantra. If he wants to stand up and take true ownership in his role in this fiasco then I would applaud his candor, but if he continues to skulk about in the shadows then he has no more perspective than those of us average line swine.
 
And for the record, PCL has denied or at least dodged the question relating to his position within the leadership group at AT ALPA. When it suits him to present the image that he is part of the inner circle, he promotes that scenario, however whenever he chooses to dodge any culpability for his actions relating to the SLI, he reverts to the "this is an anonymous web board" mantra. If he wants to stand up and take true ownership in his role in this fiasco then I would applaud his candor, but if he continues to skulk about in the shadows then he has no more perspective than those of us average line swine.
No. What PCL has done is make it very clear that his post here are his thoughts as an anonymous individual on an anonymous internet site and NOT as either an Air Tran or ALPA union official.

I and anyone that has ever been in any type of official or leadership position know exactly why he makes this distinction. He is free to post whatever he wants as an anonymous individual. He is not free to do so when acting in any offical capacity or after acknowledging any offical position. If you can't figure this out, go ask any SWAPA union official to explain it to you.
 
Islandhoper gets it as well. Excellent post, but you're never gonna convince them otherwise.

Bubba, you really need to stop telling us how we feel as a group. I guarantee the amount of frustration on this side of the partition is VASTLY different than what you believe or what you've been told. "Positive" is definitely not a word I'd use to describe it. "Coping" is more like it.
 
Gun?
Wasn't the threat to just operate you separately and not integrate. Why would that scare any air tran pilot if things are so good there?

No, the threat was kept intentionally vague to make it seem as though separate operations were a possibility, but liquidation was also a possibility.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top