Don't know if you heard all the details or not, but I'm sure Wave will be along presently to fill you in. However, I find it personally somewhat ironic that a Delta guy is bringing this up. What SWAPA got in return for not getting the $4-5 per hour override you're mentioning is a further tightening of our scope clause, already the strongest in the industry. Right now, the company can codeshare "near-international" up to 4% ASMs. With anyone they want, and to wherever they want (that's defined as "near-international). The proposed side letter says that in return for Southwest flying near-international and Hawaiii with no international override (just a increase in perdiem), that codeshare is immediately reduced to 2-1/2% ASMs with a further reduction to 2% in 2016. It also limits codeshare to only Mexico, and specifically only to the single carrier that they already have an agreement with, Volaris. That makes our scope clause absolutely the best: NO codeshare in the U.S. anywhere, NO codeshare ever with RJs, NO international codeshare other than the reduced ASMs with one specific carrier in one specific country.
Someone on the other thread asked what DALPA would give up in return for tightening their scope clause, and the general consensus is that they wouldn't (or at least haven't up to this point). Well, here's an example of a union actually foregoing money up front for a strategic, future vision: protection of our jobs. ALL of our jobs. Don't know whether it'll pass or not (some guys want the money, and others are pissed at the union for unrelated recent buffoonery), but there you have it.
On the issue of not getting more money for a "bigger" plane, that was also a strategic decision. We've agreed to the same pay for a 737-300 and -700 (137/143 seats) and for the -800 (175 seats) for several reasons. Primarily, of course, is to codify the precedent of the same pay for ALL SWAPA pilots. That ensures that 717 pilots don't get less pay (after the partitions fall in Jan 2015, of course), or for that matter, our -500s with only 122 seats. As importantly, if the company decides to buy 100 seaters, they can't pay those pilots less. Again, the union is trying to protect ALL the pilots, including the most junior, rather than screw them for the benefit of the senior guys. And it's not like the difference between a DC-9 and a 747. You're talking a difference of 53 seats from smallest to largest.
Now Wave or others are probably gonna' come on here and give you crap about DALPA not knowing anything about that (protecting juniors), but I'm more charitable and I'm assuming you just didn't know the details. So there you go, Scoot. SWAPA's proposing giving up a few bucks to further tighten scope and protect the junior guys on the list. Hopefully, now you can see this as a good thing for the industry.
Bubba
