SWA Plans Adding 25 International Flights from FLL

[HowardBorden]

I have a question for the SWA pilots


How much ,if any , far international code share are you willing to give Gary Kelly?

From me personally, zero. The contract currently allows zero. That language was hard fought for and I for one am not willing to sell it. However, I am only one vote. The group as a whole took less monetary gain in order to strengthen scope recently and I hope that trend continues.

 

[737tanker]

I agree 100% with Borden. I don't know of any pilot that wants to give GK anything, especially anything to do with codeshare!

 

[Dan Roman]

Just to stir the pot a little, it could be to your disadvantage to be too hard line on code share. For instance, Hawaiian code shares with Korean, ANA, Virgin Australia, JetBlue, Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America. It creates a lot of feed and it creates pilot jobs, not costs them.

 

[humveedriver]

Just to stir the pot a little, it could be to your disadvantage to be too hard line on code share. For instance, Hawaiian code shares with Korean, ANA, Virgin Australia, JetBlue, Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America. It creates a lot of feed and it creates pilot jobs, not costs them.

That's not stirring the pot. The SWA pilots will agree with whatever GK puts out. The votes speak louder than the words.

 

[vixin]

That's not stirring the pot. The SWA pilots will agree with whatever GK puts out. The votes speak louder than the words.

Says the ex tranny...then they ( not necessarily you ) do nothing but biotch about it.

 

[redflyer65]

That's an easy one...NONE.

We worked hard for the best scope in the industry and I'm not willing to give it up.

Same with retro pay. I'll be a no vote unless it's included.

 

[HowardBorden]

Just to stir the pot a little, it could be to your disadvantage to be too hard line on code share. For instance, Hawaiian code shares with Korean, ANA, Virgin Australia, JetBlue, Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America. It creates a lot of feed and it creates pilot jobs, not costs them.

If it works for you guys that's great, more power to you. You won't have any problem convincing me that it creates revenue for the company. The only question I would ask is: why not fly those passengers on Hawaiian aircraft instead of on Korean, ANA, Virgin Australia, JetBlue, Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America? Of course that is being overly simplistic I realize but the question remains what do those other airlines bring to the table that Hawaiian cannot duplicate?

 

[waveflyer]

Howard, that is simplistic. And is why a lot of other airline pilots make fun of us- there are treaties involved. And that requires a give and take- not necessarily a code share- but still. And inter country- inter-regional flying- those code shares allow a passenger to fly (ex.) inter japan on JAL then connect through Honolulu to the mainland or to Maui and have their bags flow through.

Now, I am a no vote. It was a great business decision to keep all our online sales on southwest.com and not sell out to the expedias of the world. It was a great business decision to not accept other airlines bags and passengers when they cancel or code share-

We can then control the brand and the product.

So I am an absolute no vote- but it isn't bc we can always fly the route ourselves. (Ie: I don't see us getting a dash fleet and flying to Chattanooga ourselves.) sometimes it's illegal- sometimes it doesn't make sense- but for me it's just a better business decision to fly what we fly and trust the customer will find their way to us if we're good enough. That's worked so far.

 

[humveedriver]

Says the ex tranny...then they ( not necessarily you ) do nothing but biotch about it.

Eh, this is a bitch board. Not much you can do about that. But it would be great to see a large number of OSW vote no to something, anything that they can all get behind.

 

[HowardBorden]

Howard, that is simplistic. And is why a lot of other airline pilots make fun of us- there are treaties involved. And that requires a give and take- not necessarily a code share- but still. And inter country- inter-regional flying- those code shares allow a passenger to fly (ex.) inter japan on JAL then connect through Honolulu to the mainland or to Maui and have their bags flow through.

That is exactly why I proposed it as an admittedly simplistic viewpoint. The fact remains that every passenger flown on US company equipment as opposed international joint ventures is good for the US airline industry as a whole. Joint ventures will never totally go away because they are necessary but I'm not willing to say that we necessarily need more. Where is the balance point? Are we currently as an industry capturing every passenger for US carriers as possible? I don't know the answer to that question but the more seat miles flown on US equipment the better.