SWA/FL Codeshare

[FlyinGuy]

That's because you're not the one who's getting your Quality of Life hammered when you "cross the partition" (when there shouldn't be a "partition", it should have been one group on FAA SOC like nearly every other airline merger out there). You simply aren't looking at it from our perspective, and the truth is that very little changes for you with this deal because your management team went to bat for you.


Wow. A WHOLE 15%? A whole WHOPPING 15%? That's just crazy talk right there...


Hey, math doesn't lie. I was bidding in the top 200 F/O's of a nearly 900 pool of F/O's (approx). That's roughly the top 20%.

Now I'm in the BOTTOM 20% of F/O's, NEARLY THE BOTTOM 10% bidding at 88%, courtesy of losing 2.5 years of seniority when SWA was hiring 800+ a year. That's nearly a 70% relative loss of bidding power, no matter HOW you slice it, which is why I've been bypassing on our training bids to come over there. Too big of a seniority hit, especially until all the guys junior to me HERE come over there and plug the reserve holes in the West Coast bases. 7 people have come out of MCO from the right seat of the 737, leaving me bidding #1 and I like it.

Twist it any way you want, but your own pilots on here have admitted that being that low on the totem pole, I'm going to be sitting reserve somewhere and I won't be able to manipulate my schedule like you guys talk about until I'm well above the 50% mark, which doesn't happen in the F/O ranks until I'm about 48, and NEVER happens when I upgrade at close to age 55, barring some pretty serious double-digit growth somewhere between now and then. I'm going to retire working weekends and holidays flying 6 legs a day through East Texas. Awesome.

You can be "tired of hearing it" all you want, but the truth doesn't die just because you don't like it. I'm stuck with it, but I haven't brought it up on here lately unless other people (like you) make some comment like the above or say something else erroneous about the integration like one of our own, Old Man Pilot back on page 5. I didn't say squat about it until then.

I will quit mentioning it as long as people simply shut up about it. Again, sorry you don't like hearing the truth that WE ARE GOING TO BE LIVING. The numbers are what the numbers are. Period. The end.

You say the math does not lie, but that is a lie. By your math, no SWA pilot was/is harmed. Anyone can use stats and numbers to say what they want. So, did this deal suck for you....yep....did this deal suck for many of our F/O's....yep. I bet many of them could crank out a few numbers to prove their point. Bottom line, most are not happy.

Oh, when was SWA hiring 800+ a year? I must have missed that.

 

[Lear70]

You say the math does not lie, but that is a lie. By your math, no SWA pilot was/is harmed. Anyone can use stats and numbers to say what they want. So, did this deal suck for you....yep....did this deal suck for many of our F/O's....yep. I bet many of them could crank out a few numbers to prove their point. Bottom line, most are not happy.

Oh, when was SWA hiring 800+ a year? I must have missed that.

The 800 was an exaggeration. It actually comes out to about a 1,600 number loss from date of hire - 2.5 years. Don't feel bad, you're not alone in not understanding that. When I pull the list out and show SWA guys where I was and where I ended up, they're shocked.

If you can prove me wrong with the actual math, knock yourself out. You know who I am. Find me on the AAI MSL on date of announcement then find me on the combined list.

Pretty clear how much I lost, and I'm not in the minority of AAI pilots. The only ones not harmed were the ones who would have been stapled by DoH anyway.

And no, no Southwest pilot was permanently harmed. Short term base hopping pain and diluted lines from the integration? Sure. Permanent harm? Nope. It's frustrating that you guys can't look around at every other recent merger and realize that, compared to arbitration results of recent years, your pilots made out like bandits. The only thing more you could have accomplished was stapling EVERYONE, and not just 1/3 of us.

 

[Dash Power]

It's frustrating that you guys can't look around at every other recent merger and realize that, compared to arbitration results of recent years, your pilots made out like bandits.

You have no idea how disappointing that statement is to every SWA pilot who reads that on this board.

We all wish SWA would not have bought your company. Every single one of us.

 

[Lear70]

You have no idea how disappointing that statement is to every SWA pilot who reads that on this board.

We all wish SWA would not have bought your company. Every single one of us.

I guess that about sums it up for where both sides are now.

At the expense of sounding repetitive, it is what it is. Nothing to do but simply make the best of it.

 

[Dash Power]

I guess that about sums it up for where both sides are now.

At the expense of sounding repetitive, it is what it is. Nothing to do but simply make the best of it.

So stop talking about it then. K?

 

[Lear70]

So stop talking about it then. K?

Hard to resist correcting blatantly false information. Go back and take a look. The only time I say something about it is when someone else posts incorrect information.

 

[ATLplt]

We all wish SWA would not have bought your company. Every single one of us.

Turns out there is unity. Nearly 8000 pilots feel exactly the same way about something.

 

[Dash Power]

Hard to resist correcting blatantly false information. Go back and take a look. The only time I say something about it is when someone else posts incorrect information.

I went back and looked and I saw nothing blatantly false.

Now what?

 

[PCL_128]

Spot on.

Curiously only an outsider seems to be the angriest one of all.

Oh, I promise you, he's not the angriest.

 

[Lear70]

I went back and looked and I saw nothing blatantly false.

Now what?

Then your definition needs work. Pretty clear stuff.

OldManPilot was wrong about ALPA selling him out by not fighting harder for those who got stapled.

Scoreboard said he thought the list was fair because not one SWA pilot will retire at a lower position than they would have at a stand-alone SWA. I pointed out that just because ONE side thinks a deal is fair, does not a fair deal make, and we came to an understanding of where the pilots are on both sides of that issue.

Then CanyonBlue came out saying that he hated the talk of "relative seniority" and said he found it funny that HIS seniority didn't increase 60-70%, inferring that the numbers were off. So I explained how that worked with real numbers.

Then dipwit chimed in with a personal attack.

Then TriPower had to come on here and say that we "gave up" Capt seats and pay from day one, which is a blatant falsehood, or did you miss that one?

Then he also said many SWA pilots were PERMANENTLY harmed, a falsehood I again had to clear up, going back to what Scoreboard said way back on page 5 or so... no SWA pilot retires at a lesser relative seniority position - that's how the list was created by SWA management.

Then Flyin guy accused me of lying about the math, a blatant falsehood I had to clear up with my exact placement on the pre- and post-merger list. The math is the math is the math, and my loss isn't 'math magic', it's just plain old math.

Any questions?

 

[say again]

I went back and looked and I saw nothing blatantly false.

Now what?

Of course you didn't!! :beer:

 

[General Lee]

Spot on.

Curiously only an outsider seems to be the angriest one of all.

"angriest?" I am just pointing out what a complete load of crock it is. My AT friends agree too. And btw, this isn't an inclusive board. "An outsider?" Dork!


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Then your definition needs work. Pretty clear stuff.

OldManPilot was wrong about ALPA selling him out by not fighting harder for those who got stapled.

Scoreboard said he thought the list was fair because not one SWA pilot will retire at a lower position than they would have at a stand-alone SWA. I pointed out that just because ONE side thinks a deal is fair, does not a fair deal make, and we came to an understanding of where the pilots are on both sides of that issue.

Then CanyonBlue came out saying that he hated the talk of "relative seniority" and said he found it funny that HIS seniority didn't increase 60-70%, inferring that the numbers were off. So I explained how that worked with real numbers.

Then dipwit chimed in with a personal attack.

Then TriPower had to come on here and say that we "gave up" Capt seats and pay from day one, which is a blatant falsehood, or did you miss that one?

Then he also said many SWA pilots were PERMANENTLY harmed, a falsehood I again had to clear up, going back to what Scoreboard said way back on page 5 or so... no SWA pilot retires at a lesser relative seniority position - that's how the list was created by SWA management.

Then Flyin guy accused me of lying about the math, a blatant falsehood I had to clear up with my exact placement on the pre- and post-merger list. The math is the math is the math, and my loss isn't 'math magic', it's just plain old math.

Any questions?

Well stated Lear. Many of these Corndogs will never admit to any possible wrong doing by SWAPA. Typical.

BTW Lear, I hope you at least consider the other airline based in ATL when hiring eventually kicks in. It might be a good alternative.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Lear70]

General, I'm not trying to rub anyone's face in the perceived "wrongness" on one side of the argument "fence" or another, just pointing out that the only time I bring these arguments up is when someone says something so untrue that I can't just let it go without clarification.

Do I understand that they don't like the deal? Sure. There's lots not to like on BOTH sides.

But that's no reason to start talking about it in ways that are patently false.

 

[Dash Power]

Then your definition needs work. Pretty clear stuff.

OldManPilot was wrong about ALPA selling him out by not fighting harder for those who got stapled.

Scoreboard said he thought the list was fair because not one SWA pilot will retire at a lower position than they would have at a stand-alone SWA. I pointed out that just because ONE side thinks a deal is fair, does not a fair deal make, and we came to an understanding of where the pilots are on both sides of that issue.

Then CanyonBlue came out saying that he hated the talk of "relative seniority" and said he found it funny that HIS seniority didn't increase 60-70%, inferring that the numbers were off. So I explained how that worked with real numbers.

Then dipwit chimed in with a personal attack.

Then TriPower had to come on here and say that we "gave up" Capt seats and pay from day one, which is a blatant falsehood, or did you miss that one?

Then he also said many SWA pilots were PERMANENTLY harmed, a falsehood I again had to clear up, going back to what Scoreboard said way back on page 5 or so... no SWA pilot retires at a lesser relative seniority position - that's how the list was created by SWA management.

Then Flyin guy accused me of lying about the math, a blatant falsehood I had to clear up with my exact placement on the pre- and post-merger list. The math is the math is the math, and my loss isn't 'math magic', it's just plain old math.

Any questions?

Yeah. Do you find it a coincidence that after 5 years of negotiating you got your contract with the large raises after SWA bought your company after a few months earlier your pilot group overwhelmingly by over 90% voted to strike?

The AT guys I have met on the line have great attitudes and say they are real happy to be here. So I won't take you and others on this board and stereo type how freakin clueless you are when you you look at this outside your myopic vision.

And General, you have no friends. You are sick little neurotic FI psycho with a penis so small it is called a clitoris.