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

[SWA Bubba]

Bubba,

You will not get any argument out of me about our MEC's responsibility in this fiasco. They lied to and screwed us.
Are you saying that the PA did not guarantee arbitration if the unions didn't come to an agreement. So GK threatening the AAI group didn't subvert that. You guys say it was a bluff or negotiating tactic. It may have been but your jobs were not threatened. Ours were. My family counts on my income so I had no choice but to vote yes. Next comes the transition bid. Are you saying that the awards were adhered to. Because I can post the message that says that SWA will not honor it. It wasn't very long after the transition bid closed that GK announced the 717 would be gone basically negating our transition bid. Then SWA said they would not honor the transition bid. Then they said they would. Now they changed their mind again and said they won't. It probably has been posted on here already. Will there be a SWA 717 TBA base? Thats what we bid on. Are you saying that SWA management didn't say that because the first SLI didn't pass that the economics of the 717 were a bit better and they would stick around for a while? Because that's what we bid on. I realize that your cheese hasn't been continuously moved so you probably can't or won't see our point of view. That's fine. We don't have to agree. I know both pilot groups were lied to. I understand why some SWAPA pilots are pissed. But for you guys to say we weren't lied to is just BS. You refuse to walk a mile in our shoes. From where we stand the only part of any agreement that has been kept is our pay scale. You seem like a reasonable guy Bubba. Try to see it from our side dude. Either way it will all work out. Cya in 2015.

Driver,

I can't address all your points, because I'm not privy to all the information concerning your transition bids. But I DO try to see it from your side, and I agree that you guys have had more than your fair share of crap served up.

Specifically concerning the Process Agreement, I agree that it obviously contained the provision for arbitration. And I believe that we would have had an arbitration, IF the first agreement had gone to a vote and been voted down by either side. In fact, i believe that was the actual intent of the agreement. Give each pilot a vote on an agreement (that's what Gary wanted), and then arbitration if it didn't pass. Not go straight to arbitration if one side's leaders thought they could get more that way. I suspect (and what follows is supposition, because I obviously don't know what's actually in GK's head) that Gary was pissed when AirTran's MEC essentially thumbed their nose at him, by refusing to send the agreement to a vote after agreeing to do so in the Process Agreement. In his mind (and to be honest, in mine as well), what the AirTran MEC did was in bad faith. At that point, he used his power to compel the MEC to allow a vote. Was it "right"? I don't know. I guess his implied position was that he'd rather not merge the companies if he couldn't do it on his own terms. (Keep in mind that M-B only applies if the companies are merged, and he could run them separately as long as he wanted, at least as long as SWAPA agreed). I suspect that in his mind, the AirTran MEC had already trashed the PA by refusing to honor their commitment to send the agreement to a vote.

As far as the 717s go, what follows is my opinion. I think he never wanted to keep them long term (for all the stated reasons). If he had a good way financially to divest them, he would; otherwise, he would keep them until their leases expired. As gas prices crept higher, the impetus to get rid of them grew. However, he didn't have a buyer for them originally, so he had to have a plan either way. That's why all the agreements had stipulations for either case ("keep" or "no keep"). If Delta hadn't agreed to take them, we would still be operating under the "keep" set of stipulations.

I AM in complete agreement with you that there should have been a re-bid once the 717 deal was reached. I don't know why that couldn't have been done. And while I know that the agreement allows management to bring over AirTran pilots in whatever order they deem appropriate for financial reasons (bases, etc.), I don't know all the details, or why they can't do it in a way that causes less pain for you guys.

I DO see that your cheese is being moved right and left, and I agree that January of 2015 can't come soon enough. For anyone.

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

SWA Bubba, while you're certainly more reasonable than your compatriots, you keep getting something wrong: there was never an agreement that any document reached would be sent to the membership for a vote. What the Process Agreement says is "subject to applicable governance procedures of SWAPA and ALPA..." And the governance procedures of both SWAPA and ALPA require that the BOD and MEC respectively give their approval to anything negotiated before it can be sent to the membership. Both governing bodies debated it, and each of them made different decisions, which is all part of the normal governance process. No commitment was broken by the ATN MEC. So Gary doesn't have that excuse. Sorry.

 

[JT12345]

swa bubba, while you're certainly more reasonable than your compatriots, you keep getting something wrong: There was never an agreement that any document reached would be sent to the membership for a vote. What the process agreement says is "subject to applicable governance procedures of swapa and alpa..." and the governance procedures of both swapa and alpa require that the bod and mec respectively give their approval to anything negotiated before it can be sent to the membership. Both governing bodies debated it, and each of them made different decisions, which is all part of the normal governance process. No commitment was broken by the atn mec. So gary doesn't have that excuse. Sorry.

+1


And that goes for you too Bubba. Your alright in my book.

 

[madjack]

DALPA interviewer: So why u leaving SWA?

RSW FO: 1700 younger AAI pilots were put above me on the MSL, they are not bringing any 717s to the deal...but were still placed ahead of me, is that DALPA policy?

 

[PCL_128]

DALPA interviewer: So why u leaving SWA?

RSW FO: 1700 younger AAI pilots were put above me on the MSL, they are not bringing any 717s to the deal...but were still placed ahead of me, is that DALPA policy?

DALPA interviewer: Um, yeah, you were hired after the date of constructive notice. And you have an entitlement attitude? Have a nice life, and enjoy your 25 year upgrade.

 

[madjack]

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

 

[fam62c]

DALPA interviewer: So why u leaving SWA?

RSW FO: 1700 younger AAI pilots were put above me on the MSL, they are not bringing any 717s to the deal...but were still placed ahead of me, is that DALPA policy?

The 717's were going to be replaced, every one of them, at some point with new deliveries....everybody understood that. Whether they came over and stayed until 2017 or never came over at all they were going away. That FO would have been in the exact same position. If the 717's had stayed 88 737 300's would have left the property quicker, it was a wash. It's also good to remember that prior to AT the SW list was still moving very slowly and upgrade was a long way off, no difference now.

The only difference for that FO is who is in front of him on the FO list. With the 717 going there will be more AT pilots, including many former CA's. If the 717 had stayed it would have been more native SW FO's who are now upgrading because of the 717's leaving, again, a wash for that junior SW FO. I'm sure the senior SW FO who is getting an upgrade out of this isn't shedding any tears for that junior FO

The bottom guys on the SW list were going to be at the bottom at the most junior bases with or without AT. They will still move up one number with each retirement just as they would have before. There are more pilots than before but also more flying and more airplanes. Being junior on reserve in an undesirable base flying undesirable schedules is tough at any airline and unfortunately at SW, with or without AT coming along, it's going to be a long haul at the bottom of the list. I don't blame pilots near the bottom from either side for looking at options with better career progression (and more career compensation as well) possibilities. That was also going to happen with or without AT, SW just doesn't have the retirement numbers.

 

[SWA Bubba]

SWA Bubba, while you're certainly more reasonable than your compatriots, you keep getting something wrong: there was never an agreement that any document reached would be sent to the membership for a vote. What the Process Agreement says is "subject to applicable governance procedures of SWAPA and ALPA..." And the governance procedures of both SWAPA and ALPA require that the BOD and MEC respectively give their approval to anything negotiated before it can be sent to the membership. Both governing bodies debated it, and each of them made different decisions, which is all part of the normal governance process. No commitment was broken by the ATN MEC. So Gary doesn't have that excuse. Sorry.

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

 

[madjack]

You must remember the much maligned senior SWA FO who upgraded was a SWA FO for 10 plus years....

 

[Kharma Police]

You must remember the much maligned senior SWA FO who upgraded was a SWA FO for 10 plus years....

Poor guy, I feel bad for him.....