SWA/Airtran pilot integration thoughts, what will the new list look like?

[Ace McCoy]

I'm not sure what the average FL pilot would want to keep from their contract. Is there anything that the average WN pilot would want from the FL contract?.

The B-fund and increase it to 15%

Also, the ability to refuse junior assignment "due to an undue personal hardship." Not that it would be needed at SWA but it's nice to have.

 

[HalinTexas]

I don't know for sure, but the increase in B-fund probably won't happen. SWA would want one or the other.

As for the second item. WN has a VJA program, so I don't think IJA will be an issue. Don't answer your phone, call in fatigued, or call in sick. There's a lack of definition to "undue personal hardship," and I wouldn't that issue to hold things up.

 

[Lear70]

Ditto that, our 10.5% B Fund is better than your 401(k) match, as #1 it doesn't require us to contribute anything and, #2, it's more money. No, not a huge difference, but some, and if we DO get a contract anytime soon, my little birdies tell me it went to 12% and that's already been agreed to.

The reason I'd like to keep ours? You get to basically double dip. You get a 10.5/12% bonus without ever having to contribute a dime AND you still get to contribute the legal tax-deferred maximum into your 401(k) to offset your taxes now and later. Win-Win. Just my .02 cents.

As far as getting our "longevity for pay purposes" reduced? Don't count on it. If that becomes an issue in SLI discussions, I'd simply push our MEC for immediate request for arbitration per Bond-McCaskill. The last few arbitration decisions have NEVER yielded a DECREASE in longevity for pay purposes, so why accept anything else voluntarily? I don't understand why you'd even mention it?

 

[PCL_128]

Is there anything that the average WN pilot would want from the FL contract?

B-Fund, no downline draft into a day off, 12 hour max duty day, ability to refuse reassignments that take you past the footprint of your original trip, etc. There is no doubt that the SWAPA contract is superb, but we have a few good things in ours that I'm sure SWAPA would like.

 

[HalinTexas]

Ditto that, our 10.5% B Fund is better than your 401(k) match, as #1 it doesn't require us to contribute anything and, #2, it's more money. No, not a huge difference, but some, and if we DO get a contract anytime soon, my little birdies tell me it went to 12% and that's already been agreed to.

The reason I'd like to keep ours? You get to basically double dip. You get a 10.5/12% bonus without ever having to contribute a dime AND you still get to contribute the legal tax-deferred maximum into your 401(k) to offset your taxes now and later. Win-Win. Just my .02 cents.

As far as getting our "longevity for pay purposes" reduced? Don't count on it. If that becomes an issue in SLI discussions, I'd simply push our MEC for immediate request for arbitration per Bond-McCaskill. The last few arbitration decisions have NEVER yielded a DECREASE in longevity for pay purposes, so why accept anything else voluntarily? I don't understand why you'd even mention it?

I'll accept your "B" fund is probably better, so long as it's YOUR money and the company can't ever touch it. I don't work for SWA, but I know they wanted a "B" fund in the last contract, but didn't get it.

I still stand by the "lateral equivalent" movement in longevity pay. If it goes to arbitration solely due to this item, then I think the arbitrator will not give FLALPA a windfall in "DOH longevity." IMHO.

 

[rajflyboy]

I'll accept your "B" fund is probably better, so long as it's YOUR money and the company can't ever touch it. I don't work for SWA, but I know they wanted a "B" fund in the last contract, but didn't get it.

I still stand by the "lateral equivalent" movement in longevity pay. If it goes to arbitration solely due to this item, then I think the arbitrator will not give FLALPA a windfall in "DOH longevity." IMHO.

Ding Ding Ding

AT pilots haven't been watching the news over the last 10 years considering what has happen to pension funds at various airlines and other companies.

 

[PCL_128]

B-Funds are your own money. They aren't a pension that can be taken away in bankruptcy. The money is held in your own account, no different than a 401k.

 

[Lear70]

Ding Ding Ding

AT pilots haven't been watching the news over the last 10 years considering what has happen to pension funds at various airlines and other companies.

You're confusing an A fund with a B fund.

An A-fund is a traditional defined-benefit Pension. Without pension reform (which we desperately need in this country), a COMPANY owns and controls the A-fund.

Case in point, when the market was at all-time highs and the A-fund portfolio had grown to several times what was needed to pay out pensions, corporate managers sold large portions of the portfolios to fund huge multi-million dollar bonuses to the managers.

When the market tanked, what was left of those portfolios wasn't enough to pay the pension obligations, the pensions were declared insolvent, and the PBGC had to take them over.

A B-fund is a defined CONTRIBUTION fund, which goes into YOUR retirement account. The company has ZERO control over it, YOU direct what investments to make, where to put your money, profit or loss, and if the company has a problem financially, they can't touch those funds, as they're part of a protected retirement account under similar rules to your 401(k) account.

I still stand by the "lateral equivalent" movement in longevity pay. If it goes to arbitration solely due to this item, then I think the arbitrator will not give FLALPA a windfall in "DOH longevity." IMHO.

Again, it doesn't work like that, but if you have your mind set on this idea, I'll bet you a C-note, how is that? I like easy money.

Again, the contract integration agreement will come long before and completely separately from the SLI. What that means is that, in all likelihood, longevity and pay will never reach the hands of an arbitrator, only the seniority list integration will. You can't hold pay as a carrot for agreeing to a lesser seniority integration, that's called "blackmail".

 

[vixin]

Not trying to be rude, but both sides need to see a benefit. When its all said and done I will be welcoming the trannies to the team. However it works out. SWA guys dont need to just take it in the shorts and be happy about it.

 

[Cruncher]

I agre with vixin.

It's gonna have to be equally beneficial to both parties; now it's up to our guys to get it done.

 

[jonjuan]

Not trying to be rude, but both sides need to see a benefit. When its all said and done I will be welcoming the trannies to the team. However it works out. SWA guys dont need to just take it in the shorts and be happy about it.

Apparently your boss, Gary, figured it was beneficial for his company to buy the other company. Not to be rude.

 

[Ronnie75]

Apparently your boss, Gary, figured it was beneficial for his company to buy the other company. Not to be rude.

Ouch.

 

[vixin]

Yeah that hurt. Beneficial to the company and the discussion we are having are two separate issues. But, your inability to realize that shows your ignorance. Another idiot from the peanut gallery.

 

[Lear70]

Not trying to be rude, but both sides need to see a benefit. When its all said and done I will be welcoming the trannies to the team. However it works out. SWA guys dont need to just take it in the shorts and be happy about it.

I agree 100%. I've been saying all along that it needs to be fair, I never have advocated stapling anyone or a windfall for anyone (re. your original reply).

I know from the Southwest pilot's perspective that it seems AirTran pilots are getting all the benefits, but the fact of the matter is that the money isn't something Southwest pilots are "giving up". Gary Kelly and the senior management at Southwest is giving that in exchange for a large, profitable company. The money simply isn't a part of a SLI negotiation.

I'm simply interjecting a little reality of how the process works. Longevity/Compensation, the bridge agreement, and Seniority are all different pieces of the puzzle. No one gets to use one as a "bargaining chip" for the other.

 

[waveflyer]

SWA is the buying carrier and that does have history of judges awarding more favorable SLIs- it's not our contract that's necessarily important but the fact that the company we work for bought you-
Like I said- My opinion: it'll be a relative integration favoring WN bc we are the one forking over the cash-
My point however is that my "opinion" is pretty damn irrelevant and getting attached to it could seriously damage the culture - which is one of the best things about this...
So I ultimately conclude- who cares? We're all better off joining up so we should let a 3rd party decide so all 7700 of us can be mad at them and call it good.

I'm still wanting that 7700 pilot shot at 7:37)!) no matter how the sli goes down