SWA - AAI question

[texman]

SWAPA's contract is binding. I feel bad that ALPA thinks they have a say in all areas in relation to the transition. GK and SWAPA will take care of there own first. I am confident it will work out for all.

 

[PCL_128]

So, what I'm asking is, what are the recourses for AAI guys if your contract is not followed exactly as written? Do you think you are just going to march into a federal court and shut down an airline or do you think you will put it through a grievance process which in itself can take a year or more?

Our holding company side letter is signed directly with AirTran Holdings, which isn't an air carrier. System Boards of Adjustment (the grievance process) only apply to air carriers, not to their holding companies. A court of law is the appropriate venue to resolve disputes related to agreements with the holding company.

OK..... I just read the update. You Airtran guys need to pick up the phone and ask WTF. You aren't even willing to keep negotiating the process agreement until you talk to your Mommy? That'd be funny if it wasn't so sad. Gup

I think you are misinformed.

 

[humveedriver]

The best way to settle this is to have FDJ2 represent the AT pilots and S3sundowner represent the SWA pilots in a cage fight. The AT trainer will be our junior Capt and SWA trainer will be thier senior FO. We could make it really sporty and have the arbitrator throw weapons into the center of the cage at various points in the fight. Anyone else onboard with this?

 

[S3sundowner]

Lol. If only it were that simple.....

 

[ivauir]

I think you are misinformed.

Then inform us PCL.

It sounds like the Merger Committees agree on the actual process to get an ISL. From your own update:

Disagreement remains on the critical issue of completing an operational merger within a specified time. As such, both sides agreed to defer further discussion. In the meantime, we will work instead to arrange a meeting between SWAPA, ALPA, and the managements of AirTran and Southwest, with the goal of concluding work on a Process Agreement; reaching a common understanding of the merger process; and discussing Transition Agreements to protect the interests of AirTran and Southwest pilots during the period between the Date of Corporate Closing (DOCC) and an operational merger of the two carriers. The MEC will have additional information on plans for those meetings, coming soon

 

[PCL_128]

My understanding is that there are still a few issues left open in the Process Agreement.

 

[ivauir]

My understanding is that there are still a few issues left open in the Process Agreement.

But from the update it doesn't sound like they have anything to do with negotiating the seniority list.

Aren't you on the transition team? Weren't you there?

 

[Slug]

My understanding is that there are still a few issues left open in the Process Agreement.

yes, and so your NC decides to quit talking and try to influence the transition agreement between SWAPA and SWA?

 

[27 driver]

There was no updated saying that ALPA was holding up the process. It may be happening but they did not say that to the membership. At least I didn't get that update anyway.

 

[Bill Nelson]

Disagreement remains on the critical issue of completing an operational merger within a specified time. As such, both sides agreed to defer further discussion. In the meantime, we will work instead to arrange a meeting between SWAPA, ALPA, and the managements of AirTran and Southwest,

27 driver, This doesn't sound like Process agreement topics to me. It sounds like your transition team is holding the Process agreement up.

I love the SWAPA President but I better not find out he is in the room with our N/C during SLI talks. I can't believe you guys are Letting your MEC chairman negotiate the SLI for you. I find that very odd.

 

[PCL_128]

Aren't you on the transition team? Weren't you there?

No to both questions.

yes, and so your NC decides to quit talking and try to influence the transition agreement between SWAPA and SWA?

Why would you assume that our Merger Committee is trying to influence your transition agreement? I haven't seen anything that would indicate that at all.

 

[ivauir]

Why would you assume that our Merger Committee is trying to influence your transition agreement? I haven't seen anything that would indicate that at all.

Cause you said:

Disagreement remains on the critical issue of completing an operational merger within a specified time.

That is a CBA issue.

As such, both sides agreed to defer further discussion

That isn't what our VP says.

In the meantime, we will work instead to arrange a meeting between SWAPA, ALPA, and the managements of AirTran and Southwest, with the goal of concluding work on a Process Agreement; reaching a common understanding of the merger process; and discussing Transition Agreements to protect the interests of AirTran and Southwest pilots during the period between the Date of Corporate Closing (DOCC) and an operational merger of the two carriers.

No offense, and it is really cool that you come on this site, but it really looks like you guys are trying to either modify our CBA or dictate to our management how to run the airline.

 

[FDJ2]

Whatever.

"Fair and equitable" is a two way street. That is hardly a partisan view. SWA pilots will be fine. We won't get anything like the windfall that the AAI pilots will get, but no ever said that life is fair.

On this we mostly agree. One other thing to keep in mind is that any contractual improvements that might be made by the AAI pilots do not come at the expense of the SWA pilots, the same can not be said of any relative improvements in system seniority some SWA pilots expect. That would come at the expense of the AAI pilots.

 

[FDJ2]

fd, you're right. swa pilots need not be scared. They bring too much to this acquisition and swa would be fools NOT to go to arbitration.

I don't think you need to be scared, but I think that many of you are.

You don't need to be, because in the end logic and fairness will prevail and it will have little to do with which group is bigger, but rather what the law and applicable contracts state. I know that many will not accept the ultimate outcome, but that is because seniority is such a personal issue that it clouds objectivity.

 

[ivauir]

O keep in mind is that any contractual improvements that might be made by the AAI pilots do not come at the expense of the SWA pilots,

Sure they do. We are acquiring a company whose financials aren't nearly as strong as ours, a company that has furloughed, a company with a lot of debt and not much cash. SWA pilots are going to be a lot more exposed after the acquisition and money that could have been used for organic growth is providing for the career altering windfall at FL.

 

[FDJ2]

Sure they do. We are acquiring a company whose financials aren't nearly as strong as ours, a company that has furloughed, a company with a lot of debt and not much cash. SWA pilots are going to be a lot more exposed after the acquisition and money that could have been used for organic growth is providing for the career altering windfall at FL.

Geez, then why-o-why is SWA acquiring AAI?

 

[ivauir]

I don't think you need to be scared

On this we agree.

We are exactly where we want to be today, and we will be when the acquisition is complete.

 

[ivauir]

Geez, then why-o-why is SWA acquiring AAI?

Good question. Why isn't AAI acquiring SWA?

 

[Bill Nelson]

Geez, then why-o-why is SWA acquiring AAI?

Gates in Atlanta and some regional feed.

 

[roughneck]

Gates in Atlanta and some regional feed.

We have a winner!

 

[FDJ2]

Gates in Atlanta and some regional feed.

Sounds like AAI has something of considerable value to SWA.

 

[FDJ2]

On this we agree.

We are exactly where we want to be today, and we will be when the acquisition is complete.

Agreed, as long as at the end of the integration process you put it behind you and look forward, not backwards.

 

[roughneck]

Sounds like AAI has something of considerable value to SWA

I don't believe there has ever been a question about that.

AAI brings something to SWA.
AT ALPA brings nothing to SWAPA.

The arbitrators will weight what each pilot group brings to the other not what the companies bring to each other.

 

[PCL_128]

That is a CBA issue.

Agreed, but the SWAPA CBA isn't the only CBA involved in this merger. Our CBA also has scope protections and other provisions that must be addressed. That doesn't have anything to do with interfering with your own transition side letter talks, but it does mean that we have our own issues to resolve. Are you implying that you would like to interfere in our ability to address our issues? I certainly hope not.

No offense, and it is really cool that you come on this site, but it really looks like you guys are trying to either modify our CBA or dictate to our management how to run the airline.

I think you're drawing incorrect conclusions. Have a little faith that both sides are doing the right thing by their members without harming the other side.

 

[Bill Nelson]

Agreed, but the SWAPA CBA isn't the only CBA involved in this merger. Our CBA also has scope protections and other provisions that must be addressed.

What does that have to do with a Process Agreement?

 

[ivauir]

Agreed, but the SWAPA CBA isn't the only CBA involved in this merger. Our CBA also has scope protections and other provisions that must be addressed. That doesn't have anything to do with interfering with your own transition side letter talks, but it does mean that we have our own issues to resolve. Are you implying that you would like to interfere in our ability to address our issues? I certainly hope not.

Of course not, but your issues aren't with us. You have a contract - enforce it.

I think you're drawing incorrect conclusions.

You haven't offered any evidence to the contrary - in fact you are reinforcing my impression that the process talks have stalled because ALPA has a transitional issue

Have a little faith that both sides are doing the right thing by their members without harming the other side.

No offense, but it isn't a matter of faith and your organization's actions are troubling.

Are you guys going to agree to a reasonable process or not?

 

[scoreboardII]

Our CBA also has scope protections and other provisions that must be addressed.

a CBA which evaporates on date of closing. Good on you for getting what you can while the gettings good.

 

[PCL_128]

Of course not, but your issues aren't with us.

I never said that they were.

You haven't offered any evidence to the contrary

Since you're making the allegation, I would think that the burden of proof should be on you.

Are you guys going to agree to a reasonable process or not?

Are yours? I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they will, so I would ask you to do the same for us. This process will only get ugly if you insist upon making allegations without hard evidence. I suggest that everyone just let the teams from both unions do their work.

a CBA which evaporates on date of closing. Good on you for getting what you can while the gettings good.

You have a lot to learn. Start with reading the SEC filings from September.

 

[roughneck]

a CBA which evaporates on date of closing

The AirTran CBA doesn't evaporate at closing. They may live under it for the full 5 years depending on how the integration goes. AirTran pilots do not get the SWAPA CBA at closing. They will continue to operate as AirTran under their own CBA until the operations are combined, if they ever are.

 

[ivauir]

I never said that they were.

You are talking in circles.

Since you're making the allegation, I would think that the burden of proof should be on you.

This is straight from your organization:

"Disagreement remains on the critical issue of completing an operational merger within a specified time. As such, both sides agreed to defer further discussion. In the meantime, we will work instead to arrange a meeting between SWAPA, ALPA, and the managements of AirTran and Southwest, with the goal of concluding work on a Process Agreement; reaching a common understanding of the merger process; and discussing Transition Agreements to protect the interests of AirTran and Southwest pilots during the period between the Date of Corporate Closing (DOCC) and an operational merger of the two carriers. The MEC will have additional information on plans for those meetings, coming soon."

You are ALPA. These are your own words.

Why are you attempting to control the timing of a Southwest Airlines business decision through an agreement with SWAPA over the process of negotiating an ISL?

How can you ask me to give you the "benefit of the doubt" when this is the first thing you do?