SWA/FL Codeshare

[Dan Roman]

You have not addressed my question. Why in SIA1 and 2 were ANY guys stapled? Fodder so others can gain is the only answer I can come up with. And the 400 of us did not even get a simple Thank you.

SAI 1. Was the same... STAPLE the junior guys.
I don't mind sacrificing, if asked, but to just be thrown under the bus. Not cool what is even more insulting is that I still have to pay dues. Didn't I give enough? I got nothing, 0, nada out of EITHER deal. I got no representation from ALPA
I WAS SOLD OUT, and I still have to pay dues. How insulting is that.

Just curious, what do you think ALPA could have done differently? SWA and SWAPA obviously was not your friend, but what could ALPA do to counteract their duplicity?

 

[OldManPilot]

Simple... do not agree to pilot stapling. JUST SAY NO.

But it's just too easy to give up the junior guys. They sold out 20% of the pilot group!

 

[General Lee]

Which brings it right back around, if it was so bad, you should have left it and gone to arbitration. Instead, 80 plus percent voted in favor, a new record vote margin by the way.:beer:

Oh come on! What NEW info did the AT guys get before the 2nd vote? Do you care to guess? I don't think it was "Hi guys, you smell terrific. Hey, please vote Yes on the second vote, and we'll all have cookies...." WRONG. I bet I know why the 2nd vote was at 80%, and you do too. Gimmmmmmeeeee a break..... Your post is now the FI post of 2012, and the most ridiculous. Yeah, everyone was so joyous, they voted 80% in favor....yeah.


Did you once work as campaign manager for Hugo Chavez? Just askin?



Bye Bye----General Lee

 

[scoreboardII]

You have not addressed my question. Why in SIA1 and 2 were ANY guys stapled? Fodder so others can gain is the only answer I can come up with. And the 400 of us did not even get a simple Thank you.

SAI 1. Was the same... STAPLE the junior guys.
I don't mind sacrificing, if asked, but to just be thrown under the bus. Not cool what is even more insulting is that I still have to pay dues. Didn't I give enough? I got nothing, 0, nada out of EITHER deal. I got no representation from ALPA
I WAS SOLD OUT, and I still have to pay dues. How insulting is that.

Go do the math, the whole list was designed for one reason, and passed SWA leadership for one reason, that was: end game retirement position.

The list ensures SWA guys, down to lowest person pre SLI will retire at exactly the same seniority number as Pre SLI. Yes, some win, up wards of 7%, most however, as the list slides to the bottom, end up at exactly where they where pre merger. This was done for one reason, the AT pilots are a younger group, will be around longer, and will move up the list faster as time progresses. Yes, some will not due to their age being above the norm.

I hit the middle, about a 3-4% gain now, but by my retirement date, I end up within .001% of where I started. I think that makes the list pretty damn fair, no matter what ********************head GL says.

 

[scoreboardII]

Remove user from ignore list
General Lee This message is hidden because General Lee is on your ignore list.

 

[General Lee]

Go do the math, the whole list was designed for one reason, and passed SWA leadership for one reason, that was: end game retirement position.

The list ensures SWA guys, down to lowest person pre SLI will retire at exactly the same seniority number as Pre SLI. Yes, some win, up wards of 7%, most however, as the list slides to the bottom, end up at exactly where they where pre merger. This was done for one reason, the AT pilots are a younger group, will be around longer, and will move up the list faster as time progresses. Yes, some will not due to their age being above the norm.

I hit the middle, about a 3-4% gain now, but by my retirement date, I end up within .001% of where I started. I think that makes the list pretty damn fair, no matter what ********************head GL says.

When you craft the list without a neutral watching, it doesn't always make it FAIR. Hmmmmm. A Neutral has NOTHING to gain, and can look at it from an outside view. But, you disagree..... You, BUBBA, and RED...... don't worry, everyone else can see it.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Lear70]

You have not addressed my question. Why in SIA1 and 2 were ANY guys stapled? Fodder so others can gain is the only answer I can come up with. And the 400 of us did not even get a simple Thank you.

SAI 1. Was the same... STAPLE the junior guys.
I don't mind sacrificing, if asked, but to just be thrown under the bus. Not cool what is even more insulting is that I still have to pay dues. Didn't I give enough? I got nothing, 0, nada out of EITHER deal. I got no representation from ALPA
I WAS SOLD OUT, and I still have to pay dues. How insulting is that.

Again, you're asking the wrong people.

Ask Southwest management, not your union. Southwest management created the list and refused to budge off it. First time in the history of aviation that a management team has done the work of one of the unions during an Allegheny-Mohawk seniority integration.

You weren't sold out by ALPA, unless you were advocating that we turn it down and take our chances with arbitration and the threat of non-integration. A position that was NOT supported by the pilot group at large after the GK letter post-SIA 1 vote.

IS that what you are saying here? You wanted us to take it to arbitration? Because that was the ONLY way you were going to get better seniority. Why? Not because of ALPA, but because of SWA management.

So would you have asked us to turn down SIA 2? Is that what you wanted?

 

[Lear70]

Go do the math, the whole list was designed for one reason, and passed SWA leadership for one reason, that was: end game retirement position.

The list ensures SWA guys, down to lowest person pre SLI will retire at exactly the same seniority number as Pre SLI. Yes, some win, up wards of 7%, most however, as the list slides to the bottom, end up at exactly where they where pre merger. This was done for one reason, the AT pilots are a younger group, will be around longer, and will move up the list faster as time progresses. Yes, some will not due to their age being above the norm.

I hit the middle, about a 3-4% gain now, but by my retirement date, I end up within .001% of where I started. I think that makes the list pretty damn fair, no matter what ********************head GL says.

Fair for Southwest pilots? I'd say more than fair. No pilot group expects to be EXACTLY where they were pre-merger when the dust settles when integrating two profitable, non-bankrupt carriers. Your non-movement cost AAI pilots 60-70% or more of their seniority from a relative position.

I was going to retire in the top 20% of CAPTAINS at AAI (top 10% of the total list), and that's assuming flat fleet, never buying another airplane except to replace what we have retiring. At SWA I won't even break the 50% mark of the CA ranks before I retire, assuming a modest 2% yearly growth.

My loss is about average for our senior and mid-level F/O's. Our pilot group isn't THAT much younger than yours. Our CA's are, due to a bunch of them getting hired young in the 1999-2001 era. But our F/O's are about the same age bracket as yours, give or take 1.5 years of age either way.

Your neutral list position in retirement came at our expense, plain and simple. "Fair" for one group and "blatantly unfair" to another group isn't a "fair" OVERALL deal. That's what I think gets missed in all this talk of a "fair" integration.

Again, it is what it is, and I won't be surprised to see at least 15-20% of our F/O's bail for Delta if they can get hired in the next 3 years of hiring. Probably some to CAL and FDX, too. The rest of us who are too old to make that kind of a jump to make the $$$ math work are just stuck with it and will make the best of the situation.

Is it great to work for a company with such stability in a shaky industry? Sure. But I'd have upgraded here by the time I transition to SWA, so I'm going to make the same thing at roughly the same bidding position (reserve somewhere) as an F/O at SWA as I would have as a CA at AAI. I get no additional money for the most part until I upgrade in 14-15 years but then never get into the top of the list to get a great QoL to go with that upgrade.

It's a trade-off, by and large, for a lot of our pilots. Not bitter, just realistic. I'll make the best of it, as will everyone else, and won't blame anyone that I'll fly with... unless I run across Steve Chase and a few other negotiating people who pushed certain agendas during negotiations. Then I'll simply bid/drop/trade around them.

That was TiC for those who missed it.

 

[UALX727]

OldManPilot, I think what they were looking at...just a guess...is who was losing more relative seniority maybe?? From what I know, the senior Airtran pilots took a much greater relative seniority hit than the junior guys. Most captains lost 30-35% relative. Many of the stapled junior guys I've talked with lost much less than that, percentage wise. Most 10-15%. So even though the some junior guys have been here 5 years...they haven't seen much seniority increase on the Airtran side.

I think we've all got scars from the new list. I went down 32% relative from where I was....it will take me minimum 8 years to "re-upgrade" again, and I have been a captain here almost 6 years on the 737. Not saying what ALPA did was right, just giving you another angle.

 

[SWAdude]

The General has a right to say what ever he wants to say on this forum as long as he stays within the rules. Everyone who responds to his "opinions" is equally as responsible to encourage his continued "opinions". It is obviously apparent that he has some kind of issue with SWA and/or AT pilots. Giving him any attention to his "opinions" empowers him to continue with him sharing his "opinions". And he has that right as we all do. If you don't like what he has to say, don't respond! He knows how to touch a nerve and most all of us are staunchly loyal to our companies and feel the need to defend them. Loyalty is one common trait with many pilots I am proud to be a part. I have observed that if you don't respond to his "opinions", he leaves it alone. So those who get into a back and forth with General Lee are equally as guilty of this interesting process. Just leave it alone.

In my time on this, or any other anonymous forum for that matter, I found not one thing would or will change if these forums didn't exist. It basically exists for those that feel the need to be heard without fear of being known. Very few of these posts would be said looking into the eyes of those involved.

After seven airlines I found my family at SWA. I wish the SWA/AT integration could have made everyone happy but that was impossible. I don't know if it could have been any better but I know it could have been much worse. One company bought another company and that complicated the integration process immensely. It is far from a USair/AWA situation but that could have been a possibility because of the differences in longevity. I have no doubt that if the NWA/DAL merger had those same longevity issues their integration would have been littered with disenchanted pilots. General Lee would would be singing a different tune.

 

[enuffalready]

I really never gave a crap about the Delta/NWA merger and still don't. It would be very strange of me to care about something so remotely removed from me.

Don't feed the biggest troll in forum history guys. You are dealing with a narcissist at psychotic levels. Seriously. 16,509 posts is way off the chart of being normal.

they way it works is most of us ignore genital. then some newbies come on and start debating him... then they learn and ignore him.... then more newbies cycle through. Genital is the perennial senior hitting on the freshmen because they are the only ones who will listen to him.

 

[scoreboardII]

Fair for Southwest pilots? I'd say more than fair. No pilot group expects to be EXACTLY where they were pre-merger when the dust settles when integrating two profitable, non-bankrupt carriers. Your non-movement cost AAI pilots 60-70% or more of their seniority from a relative position.

I was going to retire in the top 20% of CAPTAINS at AAI (top 10% of the total list), and that's assuming flat fleet, never buying another airplane except to replace what we have retiring. At SWA I won't even break the 50% mark of the CA ranks before I retire, assuming a modest 2% yearly growth.

My loss is about average for our senior and mid-level F/O's. Our pilot group isn't THAT much younger than yours. Our CA's are, due to a bunch of them getting hired young in the 1999-2001 era. But our F/O's are about the same age bracket as yours, give or take 1.5 years of age either way.

Your neutral list position in retirement came at our expense, plain and simple. "Fair" for one group and "blatantly unfair" to another group isn't a "fair" OVERALL deal. That's what I think gets missed in all this talk of a "fair" integration.

Again, it is what it is, and I won't be surprised to see at least 15-20% of our F/O's bail for Delta if they can get hired in the next 3 years of hiring. Probably some to CAL and FDX, too. The rest of us who are too old to make that kind of a jump to make the $$$ math work are just stuck with it and will make the best of the situation.

Is it great to work for a company with such stability in a shaky industry? Sure. But I'd have upgraded here by the time I transition to SWA, so I'm going to make the same thing at roughly the same bidding position (reserve somewhere) as an F/O at SWA as I would have as a CA at AAI. I get no additional money for the most part until I upgrade in 14-15 years but then never get into the top of the list to get a great QoL to go with that upgrade.

It's a trade-off, by and large, for a lot of our pilots. Not bitter, just realistic. I'll make the best of it, as will everyone else, and won't blame anyone that I'll fly with... unless I run across Steve Chase and a few other negotiating people who pushed certain agendas during negotiations. Then I'll simply bid/drop/trade around them.

That was TiC for those who missed it.

Lear, hate to be blunt but I didn't say it was fair to AT pilots, just thats what SWA was trying to get out of the deal to quell the obvious thunderstorm brewing on this side during the buy.

If I was younger by ten years I would bail to Delta. Facts on the ground here do not support SWA managing it's entry into international waters with anything but huge codeshare givebacks which decimate the juniority's potential.


The SWA pilot group while older than AT, is still pretty young and will take ten more years to evolve into a stable lagacy career of 15 year upgrades, until then, 20-25 years are the probability times for those now in the 3-10 year range. Additionally, the debacle of failing to capitalize on simple revenue things like bags and codeshare with AT make it obvious this team has not got what it takes to manage the change very well. This new paradigm was backed up by senior training center folks talk of how screwed up the hierarchy process is in changing anything. Finally, this CEO is pushing to return SWA to full fledged LCC status, which means no pay growth and more than likely givebacks on pay this section 6 to the tune I believe of 10-18%.

Those hoping for a bankruptcy to clear out deadwood, think back to 2004 when CEO G Kelly stated "USAirways will be gone by Jan 2005". Look where they are now. The system will not allow for the equipment to sit idle, the financing units will force the companies to remain in business, even if unable to remain a going entity, just so those motors and airframes keep paying their leases. That, and do you think Obama will allow a major airline to fold under his watch? Think GM or Mopar.

I'm in no way saying SWA is in trouble, but they sure are not firing on all 8. And they sure are being outmanuevered by Spirit, Allegient, AK, etc., Just like SWA did to AA and Braniff.

 

[Lear70]

Well-put. I'm hoping that they figure it out and really hit the Int'l expansion hard, thus growing the airline, but you know what they say about hoping in one hand and what you can do with the other...

(I'm sure we'll all have jobs, but I'm with you, 20+ year upgrades for those between 1st year and 8th year longevity are pretty much what we can all count on.)

 

[General Lee]

they way it works is most of us ignore genital. then some newbies come on and start debating him... then they learn and ignore him.... then more newbies cycle through. Genital is the perennial senior hitting on the freshmen because they are the only ones who will listen to him.

Hahahaha! I don't pick on newbies, just the same old guys who still act the same way over the last few years. They act like complete jackholes, and it's fun to pick on them and expose their ignorance. It's easy.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

The General has a right to say what ever he wants to say on this forum as long as he stays within the rules. Everyone who responds to his "opinions" is equally as responsible to encourage his continued "opinions". It is obviously apparent that he has some kind of issue with SWA and/or AT pilots. Giving him any attention to his "opinions" empowers him to continue with him sharing his "opinions". And he has that right as we all do. If you don't like what he has to say, don't respond! He knows how to touch a nerve and most all of us are staunchly loyal to our companies and feel the need to defend them. Loyalty is one common trait with many pilots I am proud to be a part. I have observed that if you don't respond to his "opinions", he leaves it alone. So those who get into a back and forth with General Lee are equally as guilty of this interesting process. Just leave it alone.

In my time on this, or any other anonymous forum for that matter, I found not one thing would or will change if these forums didn't exist. It basically exists for those that feel the need to be heard without fear of being known. Very few of these posts would be said looking into the eyes of those involved.

After seven airlines I found my family at SWA. I wish the SWA/AT integration could have made everyone happy but that was impossible. I don't know if it could have been any better but I know it could have been much worse. One company bought another company and that complicated the integration process immensely. It is far from a USair/AWA situation but that could have been a possibility because of the differences in longevity. I have no doubt that if the NWA/DAL merger had those same longevity issues their integration would have been littered with disenchanted pilots. General Lee would would be singing a different tune.

Insert golf clap here..... I would have had no problem with arbitration in the same situation, primarily because he/she probably would see the same thing most of us would have seen. If a new or younger LCC merges with a legacy, I really don't think the LCC FOs or Captains would be placed in front of most of the legacy pilots, unless there was a plausible reason brought up by the arbitrator, one that people involved in the process might not see. It would have to be explained in the award, and that obviously is something you guys didn't want to take a chance to see. So, admit that the fairest route was avoided, and then work on treating the current AT pilots better. There you go.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Phlintstone]

Finally, this CEO is pushing to return SWA to full fledged LCC status, which means no pay growth and more than likely givebacks on pay this section 6 to the tune I believe of 10-18%.

This is why SWAPA should have fought for equal pay ASAP but SC was too stupid to see this coming. If we all had equal pay, there would be unity among pilots against the cut. As it is now, even if with a pay cut in the next contract, a lot of AT guys will STILL get a raise when going over. I for one do not wish for a pay cut but if it happens, I will take my raise and enjoy the irony of the RSW guys complaining about their lower pay.

Phred

 

[Lear70]

Pay cuts for a consistently-profitable company that's only looking to improve that bottom line with the "synergies" of completely integrated ops?

If the SWAPA BoD puts that out, I expect you would lynch them. The pay is about the only decent thing left to look forward to after all this. :erm:

 

[General Lee]

This is why SWAPA should have fought for equal pay ASAP but SC was too stupid to see this coming. If we all had equal pay, there would be unity among pilots against the cut. As it is now, even if with a pay cut in the next contract, a lot of AT guys will STILL get a raise when going over. I for one do not wish for a pay cut but if it happens, I will take my raise and enjoy the irony of the RSW guys complaining about their lower pay.

Phred

Correct-a-mundo. Now you have two pay scales, and the lower one is more attractive to management. Who can you all thank for that? The answer: SC. He should have fought harder for parity. So, now you have a disgruntled 1/3 of your group, and they are paid less, which may be the future baseline. A pay raise always takes the sting out of a SLI. Even that "interesting" offer from GK would have been more palatable had the pay been equal, even with AT Capts leaving for the right seat. It was the better path not taken.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Pay cuts for a consistently-profitable company that's only looking to improve that bottom line with the "synergies" of completely integrated ops?

If the SWAPA BoD puts that out, I expect you would lynch them. The pay is about the only decent thing left to look forward to after all this. :erm:

Lear, you're forgetting LBB and MAF layovers and 6 leg days.... Just jokin. You know I support you guys.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[scoreboardII]

Today, 19:05 Remove user from ignore list
General Lee This message is hidden because General Lee is on your ignore list.

see how relaxing this is guys

Anyway, Lear has it right, paycuts are not happening until every other labor unit takes theirs, we take ours daily in reduced efficiencies and lower line totals. My pay giveback comment is partly do to this lower line total but mainly from probable loss of some QOL issues and other non direct pay items like month to month overlap (going to a two month bid vice one, reducing cost of overlap to 6 times a year instead of 12), that sort of thing.

GL, I'm already ignoring you so your comments mean nothing.