SWA delaying new planes, adding used Westjet birds --article

[madjack]

Well KP, that IS more time in the FO chair than any SWA or AAI CP on the list...just saying...

 

[JT12345]

Well, to technically parse the document, as lawyers would, the phrase you quoted ("subject to governance...") was placed in a position so as to refer to the Merger Committees, not necessarily to the agreement. Read it again. The committees are "subject to governance" and direction by the unions. And under such direction, they negotiate and produce an agreement. And it does go on to say that an agreement reached will be sent to the memberships for ratification. You're hung up on the concept that there was no agreement to send, because the MEC hadn't approved it. I think GK believed otherwise.

Hey, I agree that this part is not as clear as it could have been. But I think it's crystal clear that Gary wanted a negotiated agreement that all the pilots could vote on, and not just straight to an arbitration (I believe that in his mind, arbitration was for if the pilots voted 'no'). He said that numerous times, and i don't think that there's any doubt that all the language of the PA reflects that intent. However, I think it's equally as clear (especially after the fact) that the MEC had no intention of doing anything other than pushing for arbitration. That doesn't feel like "good faith" to me. It obviously didn't to GK either.

Anyway, that's the view from over here: that the AirTran MEC completely disregarded the intent, and a lot of the actual letter of the PA, just so they could jump on the provision for arbitration. That's a lot different than the idea that the PA was "just a GK lie," and that the AirTran MEC was just an "innocent victim."

It's all perspective I suppose, and I don't imagine anyone's going to change any minds. I know it's not all sunshine and rose petals for you guys over there, as some of our more extreme posters contend. But on the other hand, look in a mirror; it's not exactly as some of your guys claim, either.

Come oooooonnn, 2015!

Bubba

Bubba,

If GK wanted the deal to really pass he would have came out with the threats on paper right after AT wrote his email there were no threats to the SOC. Not after the MEC vote. He should have came out with his threats before it.

I think he is so happy the way things turned out. He has saved a ton of money and as far as I am concerned did not want the first deal to happen. If he did they would have been more transparent with their threats instead of just relying on them being rumors.

 

[PCL_128]

Well, to technically parse the document, as lawyers would, the phrase you quoted ("subject to governance...") was placed in a position so as to refer to the Merger Committees, not necessarily to the agreement. Read it again. The committees are "subject to governance" and direction by the unions. And under such direction, they negotiate and produce an agreement. And it does go on to say that an agreement reached will be sent to the memberships for ratification. You're hung up on the concept that there was no agreement to send, because the MEC hadn't approved it. I think GK believed otherwise.

The paragraph referring to membership ratification is a subparagraph of the main paragraph that refers to normal union governance. This is basic contract law. If Gary doesn't understand that, then he needs some better lawyers. But of course, Gary does understand it, because he has very good lawyers, and he knew all along that the MEC had the final say before anything went out to a vote. He didn't like their decision, so he decided to start throwing around some threats. That's ok. I'm not really upset about that. I expect it, in fact. He is, after all, management. But don't try to pretend that he's cleaner than the wind-driven snow. He's just another management type that was going to use coercion and force to try to get his way. And he won, because our pilots are a bunch of pansies. Good for him.

 

[PCL_128]

Bubba,

If GK wanted the deal to really pass he would have came out with the threats on paper right after AT wrote his email there were no threats to the SOC. Not after the MEC vote. He should have came out with his threats before it.

I think he is so happy the way things turned out. He has saved a ton of money and as far as I am concerned did not want the first deal to happen. If he did they would have been more transparent with their threats instead of just relying on them being rumors.

At least somebody gets it. This whole thing was engineered from the beginning to turn out like it has. Gary made sure the first deal was so onerous that no union in its right mind would accept it. Then when the inevitable vote not to ratify came along, he could pull the money off the table and say "I gave you the opportunity to have the money, but you wouldn't take it." Disingenuous, but smart. Certainly not in line with the "golden rule," of course, but again, he is management, so I expect nothing less.

 

[canyonblue]

At least somebody gets it. This whole thing was engineered from the beginning to turn out like it has. Gary made sure the first deal was so onerous that no union in its right mind would accept it. Then when the inevitable vote not to ratify came along, he could pull the money off the table and say "I gave you the opportunity to have the money, but you wouldn't take it." Disingenuous, but smart. Certainly not in line with the "golden rule," of course, but again, he is management, so I expect nothing less.

For all the things you "expected", you sure didn't see any of it coming. I'm obviously thrilled you weren't representing my pilot group.

 

[madjack]

Sounds like your MC "got it"

 

[dicko]

RSW FO: I didn't want to work for an ALPA carrier anyway...

DAL Interviewer - Then why are you sitting in front of us ? You've got saliva running down your chin and the secretary saw you licking the window before you came in here. Have a nice day.

 

[madjack]

RSW FO: because the legacies tend to hire right until they furlough i went to SWA which I loved until our CEO bought an airline and thats ok but the AAI pilots are all ahead of me...and they are younger and most of their airplanes went to DAL.

 

[dicko]

RSW FO: because the legacies tend to hire right until they furlough i went to SWA which I loved until our CEO bought an airline and thats ok but the AAI pilots are all ahead of me...and they are younger and most of their airplanes went to DAL.

Sorry Jack.

By the time you get this little speech out of your mouth, you've already been dumped by DAL corporate security outside the main gate. You've been carried out past the other interviewees, wondering why none of them have an American flag tie on, just like you.

 

[madjack]

Hopefully the room will b full of trannys like u.

 

[intooclose]

AND....We didn't have to pay for a 737 type.

 

[madjack]

True dat

 

[HowardBorden]

At least somebody gets it. This whole thing was engineered from the beginning to turn out like it has. Gary made sure the first deal was so onerous that no union in its right mind would accept it. Then when the inevitable vote not to ratify came along, he could pull the money off the table and say "I gave you the opportunity to have the money, but you wouldn't take it." Disingenuous, but smart. Certainly not in line with the "golden rule," of course, but again, he is management, so I expect nothing less.

It appears that he completely snookered you. If this whole thing was engineered to turn out like it has, why didn't you stick to your own union governance rules? You could have also not agreed to send out the second agreement to the membership for ratification as was your option on deal one. You could have just ran out the clock and forced arbitration in accordance with PA timeline. But, you were trying to save your hide from an extremely angry mob that you "saved" from themselves because they were not smart enough to vote no on the first agreement if they had been given the option. Did your union governance rules change? If it was OK not to allow a membership ratification vote the first time, why not the second? Why did you ultimately agree to send whatever AIP2 turned out to be for MEMRAT? You are so fond of calling your fellow pilots "pansies" but I would like to know where your balls disappeared to in adverse conditions. You can talk a great game about saving the under educated masses from themselves during the first deal, but they suddenly became trustworthy to vote on their fate when the second deal came along, why was that?

 

[redflyer65]

At least somebody gets it. This whole thing was engineered from the beginning to turn out like it has. Gary made sure the first deal was so onerous that no union in its right mind would accept it. Then when the inevitable vote not to ratify came along, he could pull the money off the table and say "I gave you the opportunity to have the money, but you wouldn't take it." Disingenuous, but smart. Certainly not in line with the "golden rule," of course, but again, he is management, so I expect nothing less.

Engineereed from the beginning? You've got to be kidding me.

PCL, your completely off the ranch with this one. Grasping at straws to describe the ALPA meltdown. Be careful, there might be more black helicopters over West Georgia.

 

[waveflyer]

There's only one problem with your conspiracy theory PCL -

Your own union's neurosis

Who could've predicted how weird your union got?
You do recognize that your own union you helped lead, really acted strangely and against themselves several times during the SLI run up, right?

That and you were uber aggressive- tried to wag the dog- everyone here told you what would happen if you tried- call your fellow pilots pansies all you want- but you ABSOLUTELY COULD HAVE LED YOUR PILOT GROUP TO A BETTER MORE PROSPEROUS OUTCOME THAN WHAT HAPPENED.

YOU DIDN'T.

THAT'S ON YOU

NO SPIN WILL CHANGE THAT

 

[PCL_128]

It appears that he completely snookered you.

Me? No. The Merger Committee? Absolutely. The MEC? For a time. The pilot group? Oh yeah. In grand fashion.

If this whole thing was engineered to turn out like it has, why didn't you stick to your own union governance rules? You could have also not agreed to send out the second agreement to the membership for ratification as was your option on deal one. You could have just ran out the clock and forced arbitration in accordance with PA timeline. But, you were trying to save your hide from an extremely angry mob that you "saved" from themselves because they were not smart enough to vote no on the first agreement if they had been given the option. Did your union governance rules change? If it was OK not to allow a membership ratification vote the first time, why not the second? Why did you ultimately agree to send whatever AIP2 turned out to be for MEMRAT?

I didn't do any of those things. I wasn't on the MEC. The MEC made decisions that I felt were not very smart, and I told them so.

You are so fond of calling your fellow pilots "pansies" but I would like to know where your balls disappeared to in adverse conditions.

My balls never disappeared anywhere. I was just as vocally opposed to SIA#2 as I was to SIA#1.

 

[maxblast72]

Sounds like your MC "got it"

The AirTran Merger Committee and ALPA lawyers "got it". If some members of the AirTran MEC didn't have some baggage, we would been able to help them "get it"

If you don't think some of the AirTran MEC had baggage, wait until you read the DFR lawsuit transcripts. Last week, we deposed a former ATN MEC member. After our lawyer started out by asking him his name, address, phone numbers, and email addresses, he was asked who he currently worked for. His response was ATA before he realized his mistake and corrected the record. I wonder if he was representing the ATA pilots or AirTran pilots in August 2011.