Southwest slam clicks- c'mon captains....

[fr8doggie]

Door number 1 was always going to be the better deal here. You guys just never believed it. ALPA at its finest.

Does that also hold true for SWAPA's section 6 negotiations? Or will "flattish fly"?

 

[redflyer65]

Does that also hold true for SWAPA's section 6 negotiations? Or will "flattish fly"?

NO. Those are routine events that happen ever few years with no hardened time line. Think about how fast Gary wanted to get this done. The SLI was going to be one good bite at the apple. Put all your negotiating capital to work up front and get the best deal you can early. There just wasn't going to be a successful second attempt after Southwest threw all the money (immediate SW rates) into the first deal. To expect to extract more relative seniority, or more pay from a second deal was a fatal way of thinking from the MEC. And that's exactly how it played out. Gary stated numerous times at numerous venues that he wanted a negotiated deal and he expected the pilots to lead in that regard. Whether you liked that line of thinking or not, it was out there.

If you wanted more seniority on the first agreement, it should have been negotiated then. Once it was agreed upon, it anchored the next round and most on the SW side felt like the company would definitely pull the money. Which they did. A multi-million dollar error on ALPA's part.

 

[PCL_128]

Why on earth do you think that anyone puts any weight on the opinions of some idiot on the opposing side who has absolutely zero bargaining experience? Stick to what you know, and it certainly isn't this, red.

 

[scoreboardII]

Why on earth do you think that anyone puts any weight on the opinions of some idiot on the opposing side who has absolutely zero bargaining experience? Stick to what you know, and it certainly isn't this, red.

On the contrary, SWA pilots know what GK is capable of, always pulling the first deal in favor of a recessive second.

 

[redflyer65]

My opinions happened to be right PCL. I posted about this very same hypothesis DURING the negotiations. My predications were spot on, and it was like watching a train wreck in slow motion thanks to ALPA. I imagine you thought it might go down this way as well. So 'sticking to what I know' was pretty much nailed.

Scoreboard summarized it perfectly.

 

[HowardBorden]

Why on earth do you think that anyone puts any weight on the opinions of some idiot on the opposing side who has absolutely zero bargaining experience? Stick to what you know, and it certainly isn't this, red.

Actually Red is spot on with his assessment. The time to hammer out the details of an agreement were during the initial bargaining sessions leading up to AIP1 in this severely time constrained situation. The ALPA negotiating committee went in and hammered out an agreement in principle. The time to reach the negotiating goals was present in that moment and should have produced a product that was agreeable to enough of the membership to pass a membership ratification vote, or not produced an AIP at all. We all know what happened with the agreement that was produced and endorsed by the ALPA negotiators.

It seems clear that ALPA made a couple of miscalculations. First, it seems apparent that the rejection of AIP1 came with an expectation that it could be rejected but still serve as a baseline to negotiating a second agreement that kept the good portions and improved the sections that were deficient.

Second, it also seems that the final end game plan was, no matter what happens, this will end up in arbitration.

In the end, neither of those things happened.

 

[waveflyer]

Why on earth do you think that anyone puts any weight on the opinions of some idiot on the opposing side who has absolutely zero bargaining experience? Stick to what you know, and it certainly isn't this, red.

What experience do you have that makes you think you "know" anything.

The only predictable thing you've managed to accomplish is a little bit of poisoning the well- and even that gets less and less as air tran pilots come over

 

[vixin]

Second, it also seems that the final end game plan was, no matter what happens, this will end up in arbitration.

Because they have the same 85% that were to chicken chit to tell GK to pound sand. What the RSW should have done. Red does it really matter anymore? We don't see their side they don't see ours. Time to tell GK to put his offer where the sun don't shine. Most of them realize how fortunate they are. The rest of them, who gives a chit? Especially Todd.

 

[PCL_128]

My opinions happened to be right PCL.

No, your opinions were untested, and you simply choose to claim victory. The fact is, the pilot group caved, so neither your predictions nor anyone else's were ever put to the test.

 

[PCL_128]

The time to hammer out the details of an agreement were during the initial bargaining sessions leading up to AIP1 in this severely time constrained situation. The ALPA negotiating committee went in and hammered out an agreement in principle. The time to reach the negotiating goals was present in that moment and should have produced a product that was agreeable to enough of the membership to pass a membership ratification vote, or not produced an AIP at all.

I think we actually agree on this point. An AIP never should have been reached in the first place if the committees on both sides weren't absolutely certain that it would be met with approval by both the respective governing bodies and pilot groups. That's just bad strategy and bad governance, and we have only our MEC and MC to blame for that.