SWA Gets More Cautious For '08

[GuppyWN]

Vixin, What is this guys APPROXIMATE seniority number? I'd like to chase this down. SWA has sent furlough letters but the pilot group reduced the line average for a couple months so that everbody would stay on the property.

I have NEVER heard of an actual furlough happening here. And just to clarify. The furlough letters were mailed. The company was all for it. It was the union that stopped them.

Gup

 

[atafan]

I personally don't understand why SWAPA tied growth with a codeshare agreement. I would have made an agreement that was tied to how profitable the codeshare agreement was and allowed the pilots to participate with those earnings above and beyond profit sharing. If the codeshare over a particular route was so profitable that SWA was paying out too much to the pilots and SWA could operate the route then start flying it under your colors.

If a particular codeshare route wasn't producing large revenues for SWA then discontinue that codeshare route and SWA/SWAPA loses very little.

IMHO

 

[JumpJetter]

I think they did it because growth=more airplanes=more captains. When you are an FO, makin' that step is the biggest profit sharing plan!

 

[roughneck]

My response was to correct the impression that we have furloughed pilots in the past. We have not!!

SWA has made the decision to furlough before. They actually even sent out furlough letters. (I have a friend who still has his) The pilot group agreed to reduced line totals ect. so the junior guys would not get furloughed. The furlough was recinded.

It is funny thought, the jr. guys who were saved by the senior guys at the time are now pushing for age 65. They were saved as jr. pilots by the older ones. Now that they are the older ones, they want to through all of the jr. guys under the bus with age 65. Says a lot for their generation.

 

[atafan]

I think they did it because growth=more airplanes=more captains. When you are an FO, makin' that step is the biggest profit sharing plan!

Well, half of the pilots are on board with that but what about the others?

Be very careful about pushing a company to expand. FO to furlough is also a move that's possible.

 

[Esprit]

Yeah, we're a perfect example of that.

ESPRIT

 

[HalinTexas]

Be very careful about pushing a company to expand. FO to furlough is also a move that's possible.

Quick upgrade does NOT necessarily mean growth that pilots want. There have been many airlines that grew quickly only to furlough and/or liquidate. ATA was guilty of that and look where we are now?

You want smart honest growth with stability. Market share gains always have caveats. Yes, there is the belief that an airline should grow or die. I share that view about any business over the long term, but there are times when it's exactly the wrong thing to do.

SWA (and ATA) needs to find new sources of revenue with only incremental cost increases. I think a real business class with high-speed internet as part of the deal is more the future than TV's in coach. Just wait till they start breaking and pax start demanding refunds.

 

[firstthird]

I personally don't understand why SWAPA tied growth with a codeshare agreement. I would have made an agreement that was tied to how profitable the codeshare agreement was and allowed the pilots to participate with those earnings above and beyond profit sharing. If the codeshare over a particular route was so profitable that SWA was paying out too much to the pilots and SWA could operate the route then start flying it under your colors.

by atafan

I'm surprised that ATA guys can't understand why SWA pilots are spooked by codeshares in general and ATA's in particular. ATA mainly because it is the only one we are doing, so it is the one to worry about. I'd be much happier if all the marketing/codeshare between the companies stopped soon and both went on their separate ways.

In general, codeshare means non-SWA pilots are flying passengers that bought tickets on the SWA website which is advertised using SWA dollars, etc. Also, a passenger may go from LA to Hawaii back to LA and never see an SWA employee although they have an SWA ticket.

For a company that prides itself on 'culture' and the customer experience, that is a real problem. We are outsourcing the big thing we have to offer, the SWA experience.

And for what, some incremental revenue.

You mention tying the codeshare to profitsharing. Profitsharing has been somewhere around 6-8% in the last few years, 6-8% of 35 million (the last year I heard management break out ATA revenue, not profit, but revenue) times our 5% Net income margin divided by 33,000 employees is jack. compared to upgrades and more flying for SWA pilots.

I'm not any happier about how the whole ATA codeshare started than anyone else. It was my impression that it was either Airtran's offer (which would have shut ATA down) or ours, it seems it worked out okay but more than one pilot around here quote's Gary Kelly's memo "all i want for xmas is some gates at MDW" which is basically how he said, don't worry, nothing here beyond getting some gates. and here we are 4? years later, expanding codeshare to beat the band.

I don't blame ATA guys if they are pissed because we took their gates etc, just understand that this SWA pilot at least, is ready for each company to go their own way and sink or swim.

Bottom line is that if SWA can't make money flying our customers on our planes with our pilots and FAs then we have some adjustments to make and codeshares just muddy the water.

We're not hub-and-spoke, we don't need feed and if Gary Kelly wants to go international, I suspect we can do it pretty darned quick w/o outsourcing it.

That is one SWA pilot's opinion. nothing more.

I offer it not to be combative or to be disparaging about ATA, they seem like a great company with great employees, but to explain to the ATA pilots who keep asking why SWA pilots don't like the codeshare. This is why I don't like it.

 

[whalepilot747]

ATA mainly because it is the only one we are doing, so it is the one to worry about. I'd be much happier if all the marketing/codeshare between the companies stopped soon and both went on their separate ways.

I would not be so worried about the ATA codeshare. My concern is a RJ codeshare. Say with , I dunno, Skywest. Now that scares me and IMHO is what we really should be worried about. SWA is a looonng way from etops and anything of that nature......

 

[firstthird]

I agree that any more codeshares are scary and that ATA is probably less so than possible future agreements.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks ETOPS is such a hurdle. There are many airlines that do it and our 700s are another battery and a couple of HFs away from having the correct equipment from what I can tell from my admittedly limited experience.

ETOPS is not impossible, there are regulatory hoops to jump through but with the desire and money, we could do it.