SWA Attempts To Steal Routes - Denied

[outerlimits]

I've already done the type of flying SWA is embarking upon for the better part of a decade. Why would you assume that just because the airline is just now venturing out of the country, it is a first for the pilots doing the flying? It isn't rocket science by the way, I've done it with a whole heck of a lot less support and structure than SWA is currently supplying.

I do it also. I am not even mainline


Nothing says pay check to me better than codeshare

 

[Flopgut]

I've already done the type of flying SWA is embarking upon for the better part of a decade. Why would you assume that just because the airline is just now venturing out of the country, it is a first for the pilots doing the flying? It isn't rocket science by the way, I've done it with a whole heck of a lot less support and structure than SWA is currently supplying.

I think you'll get the airplane from a to b ok, that's not what I'm talking about. Why does SWA have to create controversy? Why does SWA feel the need to take from another airline? Look at the timeframe here Howie. We're talking about a matter of days between when the terminal is done and when the treaty change becomes effective. Where your airline flies, compared to the amount of BS controversy it creates, are equal opposites. It ought to embarrass you

 

[Flopgut]

I do it also. I am not even mainline


Nothing says pay check to me better than codeshare

You're adorable. Seriously, don't beat yourself up kiddo

 

[HowardBorden]

I think you'll get the airplane from a to b ok, that's not what I'm talking about. Why does SWA have to create controversy? Why does SWA feel the need to take from another airline? Look at the timeframe here Howie. We're talking about a matter of days between when the terminal is done and when the treaty change becomes effective. Where your airline flies, compared to the amount of BS controversy it creates, are equal opposites. It ought to embarrass you

Corporations don't make money with high priced assets sitting idle, not for a month, not for a week, not for a day. I could not care less about YOUR manufactured "controversy." You are the only one upset. The DOT is satisfied with the result. The Mexican authorities are satisfied with the result. The city of Houston is satisfied with the result. And, the residents in the market are satisfied with the result. Embarrassed? Not even close.

 

[Flopgut]

The DOT is satisfied with the result. The Mexican authorities are satisfied with the result. The city of Houston is satisfied with the result. And, the residents in the market are satisfied with the result.

I'll agree with you on that. Es todo bien. De nada.

 

[freightdogfred]

Corporations don't make money with high priced assets sitting idle, not for a month, not for a week, not for a day.

Ya mean like the 32 B717's parked in the desert on Dec 28th? Oh yeah they were money losers I forgot

 

[SWA Bubba]

Ya mean like the 32 B717's parked in the desert on Dec 28th? Oh yeah they were money losers I forgot

So you're just that pissed off about everything, right? Man, your life must just suck.

They were parked after 28 Dec 2014 to comply with the SWA/SWAPA CBA, and in particular, its scope clause. I'm gonna' have to assume you're not familiar with it, since your last few posts have either ridiculed its importance, or shown a marked ignorance.

At any rate, it protects all of us (including you) by prohibiting not only all domestic and near international code share, but also prohibits the company from creating or operating an "alter-ego" or subordinate airline. That included the residual AirTran 717 fleet, continually decreasing, but working an AirTran-type operation and paying AirTran wages. The union voted in a limited-time exemption to this prohibition to give the company time to draw down that fleet in an organized manner after the acquisition, as it assimilated the employees into Southwest.

The fact that there was still 30-odd leftover 717s parked after the agreed-upon sunset of the exemption is a testament to the strength of our scope clause. The company was unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations in the agreed time, so the remaining aircraft were parked and the remaining employees immediately assimilated into our contract.

So tell us, oh great and all-knowing Freightdog dude, what should we have done?--let the company continue to operate an alter-ego airline in perpetuity? Jeez, you bitch about the existence of alter-ego, "B-scale" airline operations during the agreed-transition period, then bitch out the other side of your mouth (nearly the exact opposite argument) when the exemption period ends and it goes away. Make up your mind, already.

Bubba

 

[madjack]

We couldn't keep those...going from a -300 to -717 would have been too challenging[emoji2]

 

[freightdogfred]

We couldn't keep those...going from a -300 to -717 would have been too challenging[emoji2]

For you, of this I have no doubt. Seeing as you were prob spoon-fed the first time around I'm sure they would have found a seat for ya somewheres.

 

[freightdogfred]

So you're just that pissed off about everything, right? Man, your life must just suck.

They were parked after 28 Dec 2014 to comply with the SWA/SWAPA CBA, and in particular, its scope clause. I'm gonna' have to assume you're not familiar with it, since your last few posts have either ridiculed its importance, or shown a marked ignorance.

At any rate, it protects all of us (including you) by prohibiting not only all domestic and near international code share, but also prohibits the company from creating or operating an "alter-ego" or subordinate airline. That included the residual AirTran 717 fleet, continually decreasing, but working an AirTran-type operation and paying AirTran wages. The union voted in a limited-time exemption to this prohibition to give the company time to draw down that fleet in an organized manner after the acquisition, as it assimilated the employees into Southwest.

The fact that there was still 30-odd leftover 717s parked after the agreed-upon sunset of the exemption is a testament to the strength of our scope clause. The company was unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations in the agreed time, so the remaining aircraft were parked and the remaining employees immediately assimilated into our contract.

So tell us, oh great and all-knowing Freightdog dude, what should we have done?--let the company continue to operate an alter-ego airline in perpetuity? Jeez, you bitch about the existence of alter-ego, "B-scale" airline operations during the agreed-transition period, then bitch out the other side of your mouth (nearly the exact opposite argument) when the exemption period ends and it goes away. Make up your mind, already.

Bubba

My life suck? Hardly. Since you've obviously been scrutinizing my posts you must have noticed numerous references to me being a company man. GK has made me a ton of money on LUV stock so whatever is good for the company I'm all for it. I merely made a point on Howard's reference that corporations don't allow high value assets to be idled, which is a bit absurd considering in this case it's not really true for whatever the reason. I applaud GK's decision to do so as it was another carrot for the SWAPA to demonstrate their iron will leadership. Chips will be cashed in, the piper will be paid and a contract will appear sooner than later methinks. Just remember, when SWAPA trots out the TA to you the first offer is always the best.

 

[HowardBorden]

I merely made a point on Howard's reference that corporations don't allow high value assets to be idled, which is a bit absurd considering in this case it's not really true for whatever the reason.

In this particular case Southwest is expecting $200 million a year boost in annual pre-tax income by replacing the 717's with 737's according to Laura Wright.

 

[27 driver]

In this particular case Southwest is expecting $200 million a year boost in annual pre-tax income by replacing the 717's with 737's according to Laura Wright.

Are they replacing them. Last I heard the fleet was smaller. One for one would be great.

 

[redflyer65]

So you're just that pissed off about everything, right? Man, your life must just suck.

They were parked after 28 Dec 2014 to comply with the SWA/SWAPA CBA, and in particular, its scope clause. I'm gonna' have to assume you're not familiar with it, since your last few posts have either ridiculed its importance, or shown a marked ignorance.

At any rate, it protects all of us (including you) by prohibiting not only all domestic and near international code share, but also prohibits the company from creating or operating an "alter-ego" or subordinate airline. That included the residual AirTran 717 fleet, continually decreasing, but working an AirTran-type operation and paying AirTran wages. The union voted in a limited-time exemption to this prohibition to give the company time to draw down that fleet in an organized manner after the acquisition, as it assimilated the employees into Southwest.

The fact that there was still 30-odd leftover 717s parked after the agreed-upon sunset of the exemption is a testament to the strength of our scope clause. The company was unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations in the agreed time, so the remaining aircraft were parked and the remaining employees immediately assimilated into our contract.

So tell us, oh great and all-knowing Freightdog dude, what should we have done?--let the company continue to operate an alter-ego airline in perpetuity? Jeez, you bitch about the existence of alter-ego, "B-scale" airline operations during the agreed-transition period, then bitch out the other side of your mouth (nearly the exact opposite argument) when the exemption period ends and it goes away. Make up your mind, already.

Bubba

You left out the SkyWest CRJ's that we parked as well. Maybe those should still be flying too?

I never thought GK would keep the 717. It just doesn't fit into the one fleet type. Would have cost the company a ton more money to keep. So I guess the stock price being up is good for us all.

Well, except maybe for Flop.

 

[27 driver]

You left out the SkyWest CRJ's that we parked as well. Maybe those should still be flying too?

I never thought GK would keep the 717. It just doesn't fit into the one fleet type. Would have cost the company a ton more money to keep. So I guess the stock price being up is good for us all.

Well, except maybe for Flop.

Not apples to apples oh clairvoyant one. Gary didn't own the Skywest planes.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Are you really this dense?

SWA was trying to get in the market in order to compete. They want to compete in the market but the two slots allowed are both being flown by two airlines flying the same code.

And apparently since SWA WANTED to do something, everyone else should just bend over and allow it to happen? So using that logic, DAL wants to fly multiple cities from DAL so SWA should just allow it to happen so that competition can be achieved. Hard to take when it's turned on you. And for the record, there are several other routes fly by Mexican carriers. Maybe SWA should try and take one of those.