SWA Gets More Cautious For '08

[737ski]

We could take Hawaii, Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, (-700's can do), when Gary says GO, we will! However, certain costs constrain us. SWA takes every move with serious consideration. Sit, back, relax & enjoy the ride... Remember, who has never furloughed...ever...

 

[vixin]

Remember, who has never furloughed...ever...

Not SWA because we actually have furloughed twice. In 73 and sometime early 80's...80 or 81 I think. Albeit small and short but swa has furloughed before.

 

[bravodude]

Because that is what our side letter says. If we can't have avg. 5% growth, all code-share ends. It is to keep the company from growing the flying without growing the pilot group.

Oh, I'm sorry I didn't realize that you guys had a side letter.

I'm amazed everytime I run into WN guys and see how worried they are over ATA's pitily 10 757s. My guess is that WN Management isn't as short-sighted and sees the value in your code-share agreement. One need look no further than AA and BAA's One World Alliance to see how both sides benefit. I don't think that either partner (AA/BAA) has lost any growth due to this alliance. Do you honestly believe that 5% growth would continue year after year? The fact is, this codeshare adds x amount of millions to your bottom line (that otherwise you would be unable to generate on your own at this time) and you should be thankful that your management is able to see such potential. Be carefull what you wish for, HNL redeyes are a bitch.

ESPRIT

Why are you amazed. Remember a little thing called a commuter airline? nah thats nothing just a bunch of beech 1900's we have nothing to worry about right! Oh what about that pesky little RJ just a fad the regional will only get 5 we don't care! And look where we are now. Those 10 pesky ata 757's will turn into 100 in no time, I am all for us having a code share but with a timelimit, start the route if there is enough traffic and proffit after x number of years than we fly it if it makes no money than we don't need it anyway.

 

[FlyinGuy]

We are not worried about the ATA codeshare. It is the future codeshares that have people concerned.

 

[spro1815]

Not SWA because we actually have furloughed twice. In 73 and sometime early 80's...80 or 81 I think. Albeit small and short but swa has furloughed before.

Don't believe this is true. I was on the bottom of the list from 1978-1979. No furloughs during my time then or since. We did reduce flying once to keep all pilots on board, can't exactly remember which year.

 

[vixin]

I just flew with a guy on the Neg team that WAS furloughed in the early 80's. He was furloughed out of his class. His words directly to me. They did reduce the hours but his class was furloughed for a few weeks I believe.

 

[FR8dognit]

THREAD CREEP

Don't believe this is true. I was on the bottom of the list from 1978-1979. No furloughs during my time then or since. We did reduce flying once to keep all pilots on board, can't exactly remember which year.

I think your correct Spro...I think to avoid a furlough (not sure the year) a [the?] group decided to take less money (TFP) to keep everyone on property. Learned this in a jetway conversation with a SR. Captain while waiting on an aircraft. Anyone know the whole story?

 

[JetDude]

We are not worried about the ATA codeshare. It is the future codeshares that have people concerned.

True statement...may I add it's the POTENTIAL abuse of future codeshares that has everyones attention. The codeshare with ATA currently benefits both parties.

 

[F9 Driver]

We are not worried about the ATA codeshare. It is the future codeshares that have people concerned.

CAREFUL - That's how the camel's nose got under our tent!

Our agreement with Mesa was a legal code share per our CBA. They sucked, and post 911 when UAL forced them to choose between us and them they split.

Horizon had a great product, and we needed the feed so those in charge of the union "allowed" the agreement to be violated because it was in our best interest - SHORT TERM.

It becomes past practice quickly, and your ability to enforce your CBA becomes a court battle in an unfriendly labor environment.

I see the beginnings of the same mindset there, but your mileage may differ.

 

[USMC319]

True statement...may I add it's the POTENTIAL abuse of future codeshares that has everyones attention. The codeshare with ATA currently benefits both parties.

True. Be very careful. The ATA thing may be kept in check, but if they sneak a Skywest or any other "little airline" code share in on you, it could end up like what is happening at F9. They will present a compelling arguement for having feed from "little markets" that you don't want to fly mainline anyway. They will let you keep your pay and QOL for allowing this "feed". Then when the opportunity presents itself, RJs will replace mainline flying. I've seen it at pretty much every airline that has outsourced some of its flying..