Bubba, dude, this can be summed up by your post obviously indicates your perspective on SWA should be everyone's.
Never said that.
Never. I know lots of people, you included, never wanted a career at Southwest. Good for them and you; I hope they're all happy. However, nobody ever promised anyone in an airline career, or any career for that matter, that they'd have the same career expectations forever, or that all of their dreams would come true the way they wanted.
It's not, if someone wanted a career with AirTran and their domicles than obviously getting merged into SWA is not a step up. It is in fact SWA destroying someone's career choice.
In fact,
it is not.
You keep saying it that way to push your idea that Southwest is some big, bad, dream killer working to screw people over, because it supports your agenda. You neglect to consider that there are two partners in every acquisition or merger. Two, and not always with equal desire. Have you ever heard of a "break-up fee," Dan? This fee exists because both companies spend money (sometimes a lot) preparing and executing the transaction, and it sometimes goes south and that money is down the drain. They negotiate this "break-up" fee ahead of time to recover some of this lost capital, and it is generally paid by the more insistent suitor to the other, which
generally equates to the larger paying the smaller in the case of an acquisition. Guess who would have paid in the case that this particular transaction went south?
AirTran would have paid Southwest. Surprised? AirTran's management wanted to be acquired by Southwest so bad, that they agreed to pay
Southwest if it couldn't be made to happen.
So when you talk about someone who wanted a career at AirTran, and that "
some corporate entity" destroyed their career choice, you might stop to think that it was
AirTran's management who couldn't friggin' wait to sell them to Southwest. I'd say that when your boss goes out of his way to sell you, I think it's pretty funny of you to blame the other party for "destroying" the career you had working for this first boss. Wouldn't you agree?
If someone wants to fly for SWA than more power to them, but if that's not what they want then SWA forcing them into it (in the name of increasing shareholder equity) is ruining that pilots career path. My opinion comes from the perspective that someone's choice of airline is based on many factors and waves comment that SWA is " older and bigger " is somehow better?
I think we've already covered who "forced" anyone into anything, but regardless, crap happens in every airline (and other) career. And certainly, choice of airlines is a subjective thing, but in this case it is an industry-accepted fact that Southwest is a much more stable company than AirTran was. Don't ask me or any other pilot (we all have our prejudices, you and I included, Dan), but rather what industry analysts overwhelmingly believed.
You guys simply can't make the argument being merged into SWA is a good deal if that's not what they want and you guys have a history of getting insulted when someone doesn't think SWA is not for them.
Nope, not trying to make this argument at all. Not in the slightest. I know that Southwest isn't for every pilot, and I never tried to indicate otherwise, despite your incessant claims. However, it is a fact that the majority of former AirTran FOs do believe that being merged into SWA is a good deal. Not all, of course, but most. But the point is, that no matter how much you want it to be true, the fact is, that Southwest is not "destroying" anyone's career.
The bottom line for PCL is that he wouldn't accept a career in this industry, other than at exactly his own terms. Good for him; he certainly has the right to quit anytime he wants. However, I think we both know that pilots don't generally get to dictate exactly how their career should or will go. Did you?
Nobody in this industry, and I mean nobody, gets exactly what they wanted. Especially when your career expectations change due to economic and other industry factors. But, according to your SWA-slamming "logic," anytime your career expectations are changed against your will, then some corporate entity is "destroying your career in the name of increasing shareholder equity." Right? Isn't that what you're saying? So I guess that includes any pilot who ever got displaced out of his chosen domicile (like PCL and countless others), lost seniority due to an acquisition/merger (like PCL and countless others), got stagnated or downgraded (like me and countless others), or otherwise had their career expectations changed due to economic or industry-related issues--all of those pilots had their "career destroyed" by some management, and "in the name of increasing shareholder equity." 'Cause apparently we were all promised a guaranteed career path when we signed on.
Hopefully you'll advocate for all these other "destroyed" pilots, just as strongly as you do in cases when you get to rail against Southwest.
Bubba