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

[BRA]

Not sure if it was true, but I heard the last few classes that SWA did have the other year were full of retired SWA pilots (guys that missed the age 60 cut off) deciding to go back to the right seat. If this is true, I would think in a few years the company would have a number of retirements in both seats.

 

[FR8dognit]

Not sure if it was true, but I heard the last few classes that SWA did have the other year were full of retired SWA pilots (guys that missed the age 60 cut off) deciding to go back to the right seat. If this is true, I would think in a few years the company would have a number of retirements in both seats.

There were 24 of them. They are affectionately called "the space cowboys" [reference the movie]. Some have already retired or are on medical leave. They all have about 500 pilots below them on the master list. Not a significant part of our list...but the older pilots that are over 60 are starting to become a significant number. 150-200 a year when retirements start back up.

 

[FR8dognit]

Deleted

 

[Flycatcher99]

Okay, I've skimmed through just about as many posts over the many, many pages of this conversation as I can. Basically, if I may sum up...

For the Air Tran folk, merger brings personal positives, namely much bigger paychecks, much more stability and guarantee of job security for the indefinite future, much better benefits (medical at SWA is unbelievably good by any business standard), etc.

For the Southwest folk, the merger brings a generally great picture of a bigger, stronger company, which will fly internationally (something already planned at SWA), with opportunity for growth (something bound to return in the next few years on its own regardless of an acquisition), and, um, a generally great feeling that we are a big, solid brotherhood of, um, something.

My own humble, personal, but realistic and reality-grounded opinion: as a SWA F/O, my relative seniority damn well better rise from this, or I'm getting hosed.

 

[funnyman12]

This aquisition is occuring because your senior management needed to grow with a profitable airline due to the consolidation of DAL/NWA and CAL/UAL. Gary Kelly called Airtran's CEO.....he obvoiusly saw the opportunity Airtran could offer SWA a competitive advantage. So maybe SWA needed Airtran in order to grow and offer the entire combined pilot group a great career opportunity. I agree that the SWA pilots should be given a slight advantage in the SLI but your airline needs us to grow in a cost affective manner and be competitive with the huge legacies.

 

[Dogwood]

Lets start the debate and keep it business like please.

Looking for input from current Airtran pilots.

My feelings are the integration of pilot groups should be a ratio between date of hire and current pay, I'm not sure what that would be as I don't have the numbers, anyone?

Sorry, I'm neither SWA or AT, but it seems relative position with a 5 year fence on the uncommon bases would be fair.

You just don't want to see someone who was about to upgrade at either airline, to have to wait several more years.

 

[Flycatcher99]

This aquisition is occuring because your senior management needed to grow with a profitable airline due to the consolidation of DAL/NWA and CAL/UAL. Gary Kelly called Airtran's CEO.....he obvoiusly saw the opportunity Airtran could offer SWA a competitive advantage. So maybe SWA needed Airtran in order to grow and offer the entire combined pilot group a great career opportunity. I agree that the SWA pilots should be given a slight advantage in the SLI but your airline needs us to grow in a cost affective manner and be competitive with the huge legacies.

Your post is subjective. I could argue that SWA does not "need" Air Tran or any other acquisition to grow, but is most certainly using it to grow more immediately than it might have otherwise. But to use this "growth" argument to buttress the position that the acquisition is a good thing for SWA pilots is to ignore the kind of growth we're talking about here.

Yes, SWA will now grow, as an overarching entity. In other words, the SWA world will have grown bigger, with more cities, routes, slots, and international destinations. But the airline also will have grown by 1600 more pilots, the same pilots currently in the employ of AT. So, this is not the asset of "growth" that will bring enhancement to SWA pilots' careers. Any further growth beyond the acquisition, per se, is purely speculative, and thus is no more a reality than the growth we were expecting without the acquisition.

Which brings us back to the original question: If SWA's pilots do not see a substantial increase in relative seniority, then what do they gain from the acquisition that balances with all the tangibles that AT's pilots will indisputably receive? One cannot make a reasonable suggestion that the windfall of fiduciary and tangible benefits to be gained by AT pilots, combined with an SLI that is based on DOH or relative seniority, is even remotely "fair and equitable" for SWA pilots.

 

[kc81900]

Sorry, I'm neither SWA or AT, but it seems relative position with a 5 year fence on the uncommon bases would be fair.

You just don't want to see someone who was about to upgrade at either airline, to have to wait several more years.

so you believe that one pilot group has super seniority over another pilot group. Lets just take one pilot the 50% pilot the airtran pilot at 50% would receive a 69% immediate raise and gain 3.5 years in seniority. And thats fair and equitable?

The AAI pilot would go from his Sept 04 hire date equal to a Mar 01 SWA pilot gaining 3.5 years seniority. The SWA pilot is a captain the AAI pilot is a FO so the AAI pilot now has the super seniority to upgrade and gain a 168% pay raise! All the while SWA pilots hired between Mar 01 AAI pilots relative seniority hire date and Sept 2004 his actual hire date leap frog over the SWA pilots.


Thats what relative seniority means. And somehow those posting here on AAI side believe this is the fair thing to do.

funny, how no one will argue those facts!

 

[Full of LUV]

so you believe that one pilot group has super seniority over another pilot group. Lets just take one pilot the 50% pilot the airtran pilot at 50% would receive a 69% immediate raise and gain 3.5 years in seniority. And thats fair and equitable?

The AAI pilot would go from his Sept 04 hire date equal to a Mar 01 SWA pilot gaining 3.5 years seniority. The SWA pilot is a captain the AAI pilot is a FO so the AAI pilot now has the super seniority to upgrade and gain a 168% pay raise! All the while SWA pilots hired between Mar 01 AAI pilots relative seniority hire date and Sept 2004 his actual hire date leap frog over the SWA pilots.


Thats what relative seniority means. And somehow those posting here on AAI side believe this is the fair thing to do.

funny, how no one will argue those facts!

I think when people say relative seniority they mean, ratio those who are/could hold captain together at each company. Then ratio those who are FO's at each company so the list is blended. If you are the bottom captain at AAI then you are the bottom captain at the new SWA, etc. Your right though that the second to bottom captain from SWA could have 10 yrs longevity and the new bottom captain from former AAI would only have 4 yrs longevity, but now you know why the captains rates start from year one.
Luv

Have know way of knowing that this is the way nor if it should be.... just stating what most think relative seniority means.
LUV

 

[waveflyer]

All of these posts prove one thing-
There are now 7500 strong opinions of what's fair- none of which should be as strong as NOT ending up like airways. Make your case to your rep, hold them accountable to make that case to your NC, the NC takes the collective case and maybe we'll reach an agreement- probably not- get to arbitration and get the deal done. Live with it and get down to the business of kicking every other airlines arse. Buy drinks for the other group as much as possible if you see them at a shared hotel- and AVOID the SLI conversation-

An SLI conversation between a couple of pilots is about as useless and irrelevant as it gets. Damaging too.

I disagree that joining up with the one carrier that holds it's own against us isn't a big gain for each Swa pilot. So let's stop the idea that AT is bringing nothing- we are better off with them and definitely stronger and more able to grow

 

[Flycatcher99]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

 

[Britpilot]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

I have a 737 Type and more turbine PIC hours than you, so I'm more qualified........right?
(Oh, it should be "stringent")

 

[texman]

This aquisition is occuring because your senior management needed to grow with a profitable airline due to the consolidation of DAL/NWA and CAL/UAL. Gary Kelly called Airtran's CEO.....he obvoiusly saw the opportunity Airtran could offer SWA a competitive advantage. So maybe SWA needed Airtran in order to grow and offer the entire combined pilot group a great career opportunity. I agree that the SWA pilots should be given a slight advantage in the SLI but your airline needs us to grow in a cost affective manner and be competitive with the huge legacies.

Not true. We had 1.6 billion to play with. It's like, hey I have extra cash lets go buy something.LOL. You make it sound if it we didn't buy Airtran SWA wouldn't survive. SWA BRINGS SO MUCH MORE TO YOUR PILOT GROUP AND LIFE. Once the arbitrator sees how things work at SWA, Money, Schedule, Retirement, Health, Vacation, ELITT. You will see. Been on property for two and half years and will make 120K this year and half two weeks of vacation.

 

[texman]

Are you sure about your numbers Mr. Chub? My LUV contacts don't seem to agree... Or were you talking about your wishes more than your expectations? Did you factor in the previous SW statement of no growth during 2010 and 2011? Just curious, 'cause your numbers are way higher than anything I have ever heard of before for a WN "average".

We didnt grow to set up for airtran! Hello! Buy they way how many new hires are there for 2010-2011 at airtran. Any retirements coming up?

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

AYFKM! I personally know 3 of your capts. hired in the late 90s pre 9/11 (while all legacies were hiring) that WOULD NOT even been invited to an interview at any legacy(barely graduated high school). Swa did not have the luxury at that time to be overly picky. Post 9/11 as they were the only game in town they could be. But don't try to pull the cream of the crop crap here. For those of us that have been around a while, sw was somewhere between a good regional and a legacy. A fun place to work, but always behind in pay and benefits. You are at the top now by default (ch 11) not by anything swapa did.

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

 

[outtahere]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but that was "delta" arrogant there!! Jeez man get over yourself!

 

[Britpilot]

We didnt grow to set up for airtran! Hello! Buy they way how many new hires are there for 2010-2011 at airtran. Any retirements coming up?

162
Yes

 

[Ty Webb]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

This is the stupidest attempt at justification I have seen so far.

I have 6 years in the left seat of a 737 and a degree in Aviation Management. You apparently had Beech 1900 PIC time and an over-inflated sense of self-worth . . . . . We both met SWA's requirements. What's your point?

 

[texman]

This is the stupidest attempt at justification I have seen so far.

I have 6 years in the left seat of a 737 and a degree in Aviation Management. You apparently had Beech 1900 PIC time . . . . . We both met SWA's requirements. What's your point?

True, I agree with you Ty. But you can't train attitude. So what is your attitude going to be? Trust me FO's will check yours and are not afraid to do so. With that been said I will buy you a beer and welcome you with open arms as my cappy.

 

[Full of LUV]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

Ouch..... OSU called, they want their logo back......

 

[Fubijaakr]

As someone with no dog in the fight, here's the most fair and equitable way to integrate these two lists:

1. No bump, no flush. You hold your current base seat position until YOU bid out of it.

Since straight ratio would be a HUGE windfall for Air Tran guys, a better method of SLI would combine DoH and ratio. (Disclaimer: I know DoH isn't a component of either ALPA merger/frag or Bond/McCaskill, but hear me out.)

Air Tran's #1 Capt. has a 1993 hire date. So ALL SWA pilots hired prior to 1993 would be placed on the list. After that the first AAI pilot. Then, since there are 3.5 SWA pilots for every AAI pilot, 3 SWA pilots are listed. Then the next AAI pilot. Then 4 SWA pilots, an AAI pilot, 3 SWA pilots and on down until the list is sorted.

It would be a windfall for ANY AAI pilot to be slotted before a 1993 SWA hire. And given the no bump/no flush all current AAI Captains would maintain their left seat.

Granted, all the AAI pilots would get a salary windfall, but SLI deals with SENIORITY windfalls not monetary ones. To suggest that a bump in pay equates with sending AAI guys to the bottom of the list is a non-starter.

Of course you'd have to sort the list and adjust the ratio if there is a seniority bulge anywhere along the line.

 

[waveflyer]

Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve.

This is how Airways started - please stop-

 

[Sensei]

You all are leaving out one very important benefit for us--better looking flight attendants! (female, that is) I'd love to stay and chat but I have to have a new (and larger) cod piece added to my custom tailored, Canyon Blue and Orange banana hammock.

 

[carl p]

Originally Posted by Flycatcher99 [/URL]
[I]"Another point brought up on another forum, is relative qualifications to getting hired at each airline. Southwest's requirements are far more stingent, between being type rated and having minimum hours (turbine PIC). Can't deny that a job at SWA is a higher value and harder to achieve."[/I]


[QUOTE="Ty Webb, post: 2053967, member: 1212"]This is the stupidest attempt at justification I have seen so far.

I have 6 years in the left seat of a 737 and a degree in Aviation Management. You apparently had Beech 1900 PIC time and an over-inflated sense of self-worth . . . . . We both met SWA's requirements. What's your point?[/QUOTE]

Hey me too, I've got 7,800 hrs PIC between the 727, 737, and DC-9. I'm obviously more qualified than him...I like the way he thinks LOL! C'mon dude, your getting real silly now. Just take a deep breath and count to 10.

 

[Lear70]

Oh! Oh! Seniority integration by PIC Turbine time PRIOR to being hired by SWA or AirTran!

COUNT ME IN!!! LOL (have to agree with Ty, that was a pretty ignorant post right there, kemosabe).

Fubi, not bad,,, not bad at all. Our senior CA's would scream but as long as the fence for CA was of a LONG duration (at least 5 years if not longer), they should be fine.

Sensei... not right... not right at all. LOLOL

 

[Ty Webb]

Fubi, not bad,,, not bad at all. Our senior CA's would scream but as long as the fence for CA was of a LONG duration (at least 5 years if not longer), they should be fine.

Yepper

 

[vetrider]

What's stringent about a 737 type? Whoopee, my grandma has one. It seems as whatever airline is the cats meow of the moment always has that same hangup about the 'interview' and qualifications.

"Oh, what's the matter, couldn't pass the interview" blathered with appropriate pomposity.

 

[scoreboardII]

but SLI deals with SENIORITY windfalls not monetary ones. To suggest that a bump in pay equates with sending AAI guys to the bottom of the list is a non-starter. .

Your info is incorrect on numerous fronts:

RLA and A/M LPP states;

labor organizations must complete
before they can change the status quo, as well as the methods for resolving both “minor” and
“major” disputes over collective bargaining agreements.

That means, any issue, not just seniority, so pay is a major issue to be dealt with under RLA and A/M does reference seniority. This means it is acceptable and required to consider compensation under RLA. and then to fairly intigrate seniority, NOT exclude pay and only focus on seniority.

 

[Flycatcher99]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but that was "delta" arrogant there!! Jeez man get over yourself!

Wow, I really pushed some buttons with my comment. Look, it's not arrogant at all. I'm stating plain facts. SWA requires a 737 type rating and 1000 hours turbine PIC. AAI does not require either. Thus, the requirements to get a job at SWA are tougher, simple as that.

And for all the little smackdowns I'm getting on my total time, you guys don't really have the foggiest clue. I haven't been on this board since before I got hired at SWA seven years ago, and thus I haven't updated my total since then. Not that it matters. The point I was trying to make isn't how qualified each of us is at this time (SWA or AT pilots), but rather that SWA was arguably a tougher job to get when everyone was hiring. By that token (plus by common sense), it is a plain fact that many Air Tran fellows wanted/want to get on at SWA, not so much the converse.

You can scream and cry at me all you want, but those are the facts.

 

[Flycatcher99]

AYFKM! I personally know 3 of your capts. hired in the late 90s pre 9/11 (while all legacies were hiring) that WOULD NOT even been invited to an interview at any legacy(barely graduated high school). Swa did not have the luxury at that time to be overly picky. Post 9/11 as they were the only game in town they could be. But don't try to pull the cream of the crop crap here. For those of us that have been around a while, sw was somewhere between a good regional and a legacy. A fun place to work, but always behind in pay and benefits. You are at the top now by default (ch 11) not by anything swapa did.

Hm, where do I start?

First, who is comparing SWA with a legacy? I never did. I'm only comparing SWA with Air Tran. I stand by my comparison. If you think that Air Tran was ever a more (or even equally) desirable job than SWA, I have to ask, what color is the sky in your world?

Second, I never said SW pilots were the "cream of the crop". Some of them are, some aren't, just like at every other airline. I was only comparing ease of hire, and, again, if you think that it was just as easy to be hired at SWA as it was at Air Tran, you're smoking something besides cigs.

Third, your analysis of SWA's pay and position relative to legacies bears some truth. Many of the other airlines fell below our pay and benefits. But to say that our comparative position is of no credit to SWAPA is not accurate. Both SWAPA's negotiations and our good relations with management have resulted in such a strong company and such financial health, that SWA was able to sustain resilience in the midst of industry scalebacks and recession. So yes, our top pay is partly due to others pulling back, but it's also due to our strength in being able not only to be stable financially, but even get a pay raise in the middle of this recession.