SWA Side Letter.

[waveflyer]

;-)
Blond hair, blue eyes(!) I'm with you on that

 

[Lear70]

And not the "blonde in a bottle..."

:beer:

 

[frqntflyr]

The problem with this side letter is it sets a recent precedent for 6 TFP for RSV. I do not believe reserves should be paid 10% less than everyone else. I think that reserve is our weakest contract section. Sitting for free after getting abused for 3 weeks, b scale 6 TFP, getting used twice in one day, 15 hr RAPs, no long call, 6hrs of block liability on 1-3 day blocks. Why agree to 6 TFP for reserve when negotiating international? If we vote NO do we really think the company won't sweeten it up a bit? Will they scrap INTL flying? Will they dare come back with worse after all we have given over the past 2 years? Let's show we can vote NO when a package is not up to snuff. I've voted NO for TA1 YES for TA2, NO for -800s, YES for SL10. I'm by no means a hardcore NO voter but this is too scrambled and off point IMO. So far my feeling on the line is this fails.

 

[scoreboardII]

I'm with Lear, I've sacrificed my body to gods of airport food for 10 years, no more.

In either event, it's NA, the FA's just voted no on giving up ADG, maybe we can follow their lead and go back to the drawing board.

 

[ultrarunner]

Bubba said SWA's scope states, "No RJ's ever". Out of curiosity, what do you guys consider RJ's? Is a EMB 190/195 considered an RJ? If I remember correctly, Embraer does not categorize it as such. Is it 75 seats and below? 50 seats? Not trying to make an argument where there isn't one. Just curious of your language.
Thanks

I suspect the language states that SWA doesn't whore-out it's flying. Who gives a crapola what size bird it is...

It's the fact there is language in their contract which PROHIBITS that activity. THAT is what matters. And it's what protects a SWAPA job!

Just my opinion...

 

[scoreboardII]

This is nice:


May 21, 2012


Fellow AirTran Pilots,

This morning, the Delta MEC ratified a tentative agreement for a new collective bargaining agreement, which includes pay rates for the Boeing 717. Let me stress that as of today, your MEC has not been told of any specific plan to retire the B717 early. Nonetheless, we are extremely cognizant of the negative ramifications of such a scenario to our pilots; including a potential loss of captain seats, serious financial harm and the possibility that pilots who bid the B717 to avoid commuting could find themselves becoming commuters in a very challenging environment.

For our new Company, which is working diligently to meet its return on investment targets, it is probably easy math to see the economic advantage of retiring the B717 ahead of the B737 “classics.” What is less obvious is the impact such a move would have on the morale of our pilots, and the culture of the airline.

For the past several weeks, my fellow MEC officers, as well as your status representatives, have been hearing from a broad spectrum of pilots who express they are feeling as something less than a full Southwest employee. Management has informed us that they have heard you as well.

It is our expectation that Southwest leadership recognizes that if a deal is reached to retire the B717s before 2015 the world will look very different to our pilots than the one they were expecting after the seniority integration agreement was ratified.

While getting rid of the B717s and moving back to a single fleet-type may be a smart business move, should the transaction take place, we cannot accept that once again, it would be the AirTran pilots who will shoulder the burden exclusively.

We believe that Mr. Kelly and his team, unlike other airline managements, value the sacrifices that we have already made, and will do what is right. If they find a deal to retire the B717 quickly, the facts on the ground will have changed with regard to the SIA, and not by our doing. Should this occur, be assured that your MEC will be engaging with management to mitigate the negative impact to our members.

To reiterate, as of today, we do not have information of a deal to retire the B717 ahead of what is outlined in the transition agreement.


I’ll see you at the airport.

Fly safe,

Capt. Jim Morris, Chairman
ATN Master Executive Council

Sorry, but when the CEO tells you he's going to get rid of an airframe before you vote, you might want to consider that it could or will happen.

 

[PCL_128]

The CEO never told us that before the vote. In fact, we were told by SWA management at road shows that the airplanes would be around until the leases expire.

 

[shootr]

When I got hired on at SWA, they never told me they'd buy another airline, in fact, they told me I might upgrade in 5 years. You make decisions in life with the info you have before you. We both said yes by 86%. Anything past that is business by management which none of us have control over.

You knew the possibilities and to say you didn't makes you look petty and foolish. Sorry if that stings. You could have said no. How might that have worked out?

 

[PCL_128]

You could have said no.

In fact, I did. But the majority rules. Such is a democracy.

I don't disagree with your premise that we knew the possibilities before voting. But I was just responding to scoreboard's claim that we were told something before voting that we in fact were not told.

 

[Lear70]

The CEO never told us that before the vote. In fact, we were told by SWA management at road shows that the airplanes would be around until the leases expire.

Correct.

At the road shows, the question was asked whether the plan was for the 717's to go away early. The response from Southwest management representatives was the same as during negotiations, that by accepting the lower pay until 1/1/15, it had made the financials of the aircraft acceptable for them to remain through at least the end of the integration, and likely to their lease expiration.

In the SIA documents there is no reference anywhere to the 717's going away early except in Side Letter 10 (which by Process Agreement we had no say in), with one small blurb as follows:

E.2 - AirTran pilots whose seat positions are eliminated by reduction of the B717 fleet will bid system seniority for their new assignment.

In combination with the rest of Side Letter 10's restrictions, the early elimination of the 717 would take every last AirTran Captain and make them an F/O, due to the clause that no AirTran pilot will be allowed to hold 737 CA until 1/1/15.

In negotiations there was NO stated possibility of early retirement of the 717, that's zero, nada, nothing, zilch. We discussed that possibility in private discussions, brought it up in negotiations (which primarily was with SWA management, not SWAPA), and were repeatedly assured that the airplane wasn't going anywhere as long as we ratified SIA 2.

May or may not make a difference; it all depends on what happens with the 717's...

 

[Ky.BrownBourbn]

I suspect the language states that SWA doesn't whore-out it's flying. Who gives a crapola what size bird it is...

It's the fact there is language in their contract which PROHIBITS that activity. THAT is what matters. And it's what protects a SWAPA job!

Just my opinion...

Actually it does allow RJ's (or codeshare with commuter type A/C) but only in Inter-island Hawaii flying AND From Island to Island within the Caribbean.

Not sure if that was changed in SL12 we are voting on now? (can't find it and apparently I have lost my negotiating notes that SWAPA let me borrow! ;(

Good Luck,
KBB

 

[scoreboardII]

I think the only unfortunate and glaringly unreasonable comment in that letter is stating "feeling somewhat less than full Southwest pilots". Well guess who hasn't felt like full SWA pilots either since the CEO dumped organic growth? Welcome to SWA guys, it's just business.

 

[scoreboardII]

QUOTE]In negotiations there was NO stated possibility of early retirement of the 717, that's zero, nada, nothing, zilch. We discussed that possibility in private discussions, brought it up in negotiations (which primarily was with SWA management, not SWAPA), and were repeatedly assured that the airplane wasn't going anywhere as long as we ratified SIA 2.

The saving grace is it's impossible for SWA to dump the 717's by 2015, so you have that going for you. SWA can't loose the lift, SWA can't train you guys fast enough on the 737, SWA can't get enough 737's.

 

[humveedriver]

Well guess who hasn't felt like full SWA pilots either since the CEO dumped organic growth? Welcome to SWA guys, it's just business.

That's how we feel. You can have your union president write your own letter. The more harm that transpires to the AT group, the better it is for your group. I got that part. If and when this happens it resets the "moving forward" clock for our side to zero. Nothing to do but wait and see.

-BTW notice that no AT pilot posted the memo. We still have hope that SWA is an employee first airline. And we are wholly owned employees now.

 

[fam62c]

There's no reason to start arguing about something that hasn't happened yet and may not happen. The fact that they deferred -800's seems to me to make it very likely that they do not have a way out of the 717 leases. I have to think that if there was a deal out there it would have already been done.