Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWA TA Passes

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
There will be no rest... Time now for you guys to buy some 717's and datranny.
Congrats on the new contract hopefully it works out great for you guys!
 
about a 93% turnout too. Glad it is over for now.
 
No RJ codeshare (except to provide inter-island service within the Hawaiian islands or Caribbean). TA1 allowed RJs if we bought a carrier with a regional (ie. F9). No domestic codeshare. Near international codeshare (ie. Mexico/ Canada) limited to 4% total ASMs flown by SWA. Holiday pay (at time and a half). 401k match to 7.8% in 2009, 9.3% in 2010. Full retro (salary and 401k). A little less pay than TA1, but not bad at all in this economy. I'd like to give a shout out to our negotiating team.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Trip,

Maybe the same for you...it is MUCH better for me and many like me. The differences are easily worth more than moving the 2% raise to the last year of the contract. Now instead of an earnings cut, I'll break even. Good? No. Better than TA1? No doubt! Sorry you had to wait for your retro and one of the 2% raises. Really, I am!

shootr
 
shootr said:
Trip,

Maybe the same for you...it is MUCH better for me and many like me. The differences are easily worth more than moving the 2% raise to the last year of the contract. Now instead of an earnings cut, I'll break even. Good? No. Better than TA1? No doubt! Sorry you had to wait for your retro and one of the 2% raises. Really, I am!

shootr
Click to expand...
I agree.
For me the biggest improvement in TA2 was the change in RJ codeshare language. Because I used to work for a RJ carrier that took flying away from mainline. My company was increasingly serving markets with RJs that previously were flown by A320s and DC-9s.
 
shootr said:
Trip,

Maybe the same for you...it is MUCH better for me and many like me. The differences are easily worth more than moving the 2% raise to the last year of the contract. Now instead of an earnings cut, I'll break even. Good? No. Better than TA1? No doubt! Sorry you had to wait for your retro and one of the 2% raises. Really, I am!

shootr
Click to expand...

I am not gonna argue with you, but this is essentially the same POS that TA1 was, with less money.

Oh, and not only did I vote no on TA1, I was deeply involved in the grass roots efforts that got it shot down. I figured (incorrectly) that we, as a group, finally woke up, and that most would see TA2 as, at best, break even with TA1.

Now, as the "interpretation, errrr..... implementation plan" is enacted, we'll get to see what we really got, or didn't...... I am sure that the scheduling policy handbook is back from the printers already.
 
are you a lance.....if so quit your crying we are getting tired of it.....if your not....then oh well. I was a no voter for #1 but a Yes voter for #2....I think they fixed some good things with #2
 
I like the changes in TA2 much better. So move the 2% raise down the road, I do better by moving the 2% 401k bump forward. We need to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

I'm glad to get it behind us and lets move on and focus our energy where it needs to be..
 
RedDogC130 said:
are you a lance.....if so quit your crying we are getting tired of it.....if your not....then oh well.
Click to expand...

Not a lance and haven't been for almost 9 years. I am not crying.


I was a no voter for #1 but a Yes voter for #2....I think they fixed some good things with #2
Click to expand...

OK, whatever works for you......

As I said, I will never understand this pilot group......
 
No contract is perfect. Lots of things in this could be better and we can work on that next year when negotiations start again but this is good and better than TA1. I was no on TA1 Yes on TA2.

Bet we get a big announcement before December. No idea what it is but got the feeling Gary is feeling some heat to produce. FAA fines strike one, Frontier strike two. Gary needs a hit bad.
 
If you think its a better contract by negotiating half a million dollars less wages for an average career compared to the value of our 2006 wages, then congratulations.
 
Tripower455 said:
I am not gonna argue with you, but this is essentially the same POS that TA1 was, with less money.

Oh, and not only did I vote no on TA1, I was deeply involved in the grass roots efforts that got it shot down. I figured (incorrectly) that we, as a group, finally woke up, and that most would see TA2 as, at best, break even with TA1.

Now, as the "interpretation, errrr..... implementation plan" is enacted, we'll get to see what we really got, or didn't...... I am sure that the scheduling policy handbook is back from the printers already.
Click to expand...

If you were a one-man negotiation committee, what would you do to make this the "perfect" contract?
 
TA2 is better than TA1, no doubt. But it still wasn't good enough for me. I've got 30 years to go at this place and giving away our near-int'l flying is just plain wrong. I refuse to vote on anything that allows the outsourcing of my job. At some point in the near future domestic flying is going to reach max capacity and we'll have nowhere to go but int'l. We let that cat out of the bag with the 4%. Ok, so we locked-down far-int'l. Yay. I don't see Gary buying 777s so we can go to Tokyo.

We can fly to Mexico, the Caribbean and Canada ourselves, right now, with 737s. Why SWAPA was not budging on far-int'l but gave away near-int'l still confuses the hell out of me. They've got the "good" and "bad" codeshare all mixed up.

But that's just my opinion. Sorry I'm now in the 13% minority.
 
I voted No...A lot of years and money negotiating and we get a contract that we could have achieved in a weekend with a couple of good side-letters...We didn't need a Section 6 for this.

Oh well...I am part of SWAPA so I guess we voted yes.
 
Tripower,

The way the vote turned out and the pummeling that the no vote candidates like Wells and JD took, it will be interesting how the runoff candidates handle the vote results in their campaign.

I'm not so sure that "I don't understand you guys" is going to play all that well for a wannabe rep.
 
Widow's Son said:
Tripower,

The way the vote turned out and the pummeling that the no vote candidates like Wells and JD took, it will be interesting how the runoff candidates handle the vote results in their campaign.

I'm not so sure that "I don't understand you guys" is going to play all that well for a wannabe rep.
Click to expand...

Whatever.
 
I was a no voter on TA1 but voted yes on TA2. #2 does not fix everything. There is no way that Carl and the BoD would be able to do better than what we have now. They sold us a little short several years ago. Besides our contract was written in 1994. There is no way that we can fix everything in one go round (especially in this economy). I am not happy, but I am comfortable with this deal and I will vote for execs and BoD members that will be aggressive in our next round.
 
turn&pull said:
I voted No...A lot of years and money negotiating and we get a contract that we could have achieved in a weekend with a couple of good side-letters...We didn't need a Section 6 for this.

Oh well...I am part of SWAPA so I guess we voted yes.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you. This took over 3 years.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom