SWA Lance Captains (seat swapping pilots)

[SWA Bubba]

Wait. I thought SWApA wanted LC eliminated. The LC restrictions in this contract were touted as one of the many SWApA "gains" that our crack "negotiators" were able to wrest from the clutches of the company. No wonder the current " negotiations'" are taking so long. GK is still reeling from the shellacking we gave him last time!

Actually, you're mistaken. SWAPA did not want the lance captain program eliminated, and they most certainly did not "tout" lance restrictions as a "gain" in the last contract. What happened was that they bargained to keep the program (as the pilots wanted), while the company wanted it gone immediately and in its entirety. What we got was a compromise, which reportedly was as far as the company would go. And I assume that we got a little something, for giving the company a partial gain that they wanted. The fact is, that if the union wanted the program gone, it would have been gone, since the company has wanted it gone for a long, long time.

And I realize you're one of those guys who hates the union, for whatever reason you have (did you run for office and get beaten or something?). I also realize that no matter who's in power, and no matter what they do or accomplish, you'll still bitch about it. And that nothing they do will ever be considered good, or even adequate, in your eyes. There's a few guys like that on this and other boards.

But perhaps you'd be taken a little more seriously, if you didn't do such childish things as referring to the union as "SWApA" instead of SWAPA. When moderates see posts containing obvious smartass exaggerations like yours, and the union referred to as "SWApA" or "SNAPA," instead of by its real name, they realize that they're reading the thoughts of an extremist anti-anything-SWAPA guy, and they can safely be ignored.

You might want to consider that. Assuming, of course, that you want to be taken seriously, that is.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

You may be right. But I believe if the company is successful at getting rid of the lance program it will have unintended consequences. The result will be Captains who fly from the right seat. There is no liability issue. Both pilots are PIC qualified for the airplane. From a training standpoint, it's 5 minutes of slides and oral questions, right seat landing and "pulling" the alt gear extension cables. Voila. You are good to go. I understand under the current system only check airman and Lances can fly both seats. My point is, I think the company will jump on the two seats for the price of one flexibility, and claim the absence of the lance program was the result. As I see it, it's just economy of force.

What matters is that the company believes it's a liability issue. And that's as reported by numerous training center guys, as well as the former VP FltOps himself, everybody's favorite Chuck Magill.

I'm confused about your comment about smaller carriers? Seems like the same logic still applies at SWA, as the historically run lean on pilots and reserves. Evident by the high number of JA's this summer.

And while I certainly agree that you're entitled to your opinion (and I agree that it would be relatively easy to qualify captains in the right seat), it's my opinion that the company won't do it. My opinion is based on what I've seen and heard here. Besides the presumed liability issue, there's practical ones as well. The union and pilots will bitch, and it might be relatively hard to get a captain to sit in the right seat. Any captain who does this will be denigrated or ostracized for his actions, as the belief is that in that case, the company needs to hire more F/Os. I've seen that at some carriers, captains who fly right seat are referred to as scabs (not that I agree with the characterization). It would probably be easier for the company to get a F/O to do it for premium (greedy pilots literally fight over premium flying) that a reluctant captain, for the same cost. Plus, if they're down to absolutely no available FOs to fly, there probably aren't any free captains sitting around who could do it. Historically, the company JAs captains at a higher rate than FOs.

As far as company size goes, I said that because that makes a much higher pool to draw premium flyers from, compared to a smaller company. I don't know that any other large carriers do that. Can a United, American or Delta guy chime in here? Do any of you guys have captains flying right seat?

Anyway, that's my opinion. I guess we'll see what actually happens.

Bubba

 

[Tripower455]

Actually, you're mistaken. SWAPA did not want the lance captain program eliminated, and they most certainly did not "tout" lance restrictions as a "gain" in the last contract. What happened was that they bargained to keep the program (as the pilots wanted), while the company wanted it gone immediately and in its entirety. What we got was a compromise, which reportedly was as far as the company would go. And I assume that we got a little something, for giving the company a partial gain that they wanted. The fact is, that if the union wanted the program gone, it would have been gone, since the company has wanted it gone for a long, long time.

Maybe I am mistaken about it being touted as a SWApA "gain", (I think I still have the SWAPA GAINS! SWApAganda pamphlet around somewhere. It was so unbelievable, that I think I kept it)but CK and Brink were both vocal opponents of the LC and ELITT programs as long as I have been here, so forgive me if I mistook the the LC issue as one of the many SWApA "gains" in the current CBA. It's kind of hard to tell the difference when most of the "gains" weren't

And I realize you're one of those guys who hates the union, for whatever reason you have (did you run for office and get beaten or something?).

I don't hate the union. I hate the constant concessions SWApA gives to the company, on every single issue. It's been going on as long as I've been here. We rarely, if ever, get anything for our efforts. We'll see if this BOD has the nuts to reject the turd that's surely in the pipeline.

Oh, and I was beaten by somewhere around 13 votes in the first one, and 9 in the runoff, IIRC. Not sure what difference that makes. Good thing the other guy won, and quit before he was recalled!

I also realize that no matter who's in power, and no matter what they do or accomplish, you'll still bitch about it. And that nothing they do will ever be considered good, or even adequate, in your eyes. There's a few guys like that on this and other boards.

Sorry, but damn near every BOD we've had in my tenure here has given away the store on just about every issue placed before them.

This job sucks more today than it did 10 years ago, and much of that suckiness is directly attributable to SWApA's constant capitulation to management. What, 16 side letters, many during "negotiations", and nothing, whatsoever (except more work for less pay and far worse QOL) to show for them.

Now, they're not even denying that we're giving away codeshare, better retirement, retro and other stuff, all for sub cola "raises".

We've got a lot of great guys on the BOD right now. I hope that they have the collective sack to flush the turd that is surely being churned up by the Toms.

But perhaps you'd be taken a little more seriously, if you didn't do such childish things as referring to the union as "SWApA" instead of SWAPA. When moderates see posts containing obvious smartass exaggerations like yours, and the union referred to as "SWApA" or "SNAPA," instead of by its real name, they realize that they're reading the thoughts of an extremist anti-anything-SWAPA guy, and they can safely be ignored.

Yup, "safely ignored". If the pilot group had listened to the "extremists", instead of Club 19 for the last decade or so, we'd not be having this discussion.

You might want to consider that. Assuming, of course, that you want to be taken seriously, that is.



Bubba

Personally, I don't GAS. You guys are going to do the same thing you always do.: Accept and hard sell another substandard TA like we took the company to the cleaners, when, in fact, the opposite will be the case.

Only SWApA could mess this up in "this environment".

Posts like yours are a sure sign that another concessionary TA is imminent.

Seriously, I would LOVE to be wrong, just once, and unlike former SWApA types, would freely admit it. If it ever happens.

 

[FlyinGuy]

KP, I'll say it again. You have no clue how "flexability" works. I benefited when I was junior, and I benefited when I was senior. The more people that touch a trip before the trip starts, the better. The two biggest hits were the 9 day restrictions and the ELITT restrictions. Even with those, people still have the ability to improve their schedules.

 

[Kharma Police]

KP, I'll say it again. You have no clue how "flexability" works. I benefited when I was junior, and I benefited when I was senior. The more people that touch a trip before the trip starts, the better. The two biggest hits were the 9 day restrictions and the ELITT restrictions. Even with those, people still have the ability to improve their schedules.

Well, since you personally benifited from the program, I guess it's okay......

 

[shootr]

Everybody benefits from the program except those who fly their line and NEVER trade or Elitt. LC's are the grease that gets trips moving back and forth, eventually improving everybody's line (with the possible exception of reserves).

Tri, taking the LC program down to 9 CA days per lance was a gain from TA1 to TA2, which eliminated it. Codeshare protections were also a gain from 1 to 2. THOSE are the reasons the pay went down a little from TA1 to TA2. Definitely worth it, in my opinion. Esp. the section 1 stuff.

 

[Tripower455]

Tri, taking the LC program down to 9 CA days per lance was a gain from TA1 to TA2, which eliminated it.

So, not as much of a loss from what we had before is considered a "gain"? You'd be perfect for a SWApA position.

The fact is that Brink Cobb and Carl Kuwitzky hated the lance program (and anything else that might help out a junior guy, since it might jeopardize their ability to pick up on their days off) for decades prior to that "negotiation".

I'm sure that Brink lobbied extra hard to keep the Lance program in TA1.

Codeshare protections were also a gain from 1 to 2.

The CS protections were the only thing we gained in the current contract.

THOSE are the reasons the pay went down a little from TA1 to TA2. Definitely worth it, in my opinion. Esp. the section 1 stuff.

The sad thing is that we wouldn't have had to play the quid pro quo game had SWApA had a set to begin with.