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 to speed up Airtran integration.....article

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
PCL_128 said:
Blatant violation of FMLA and USERRA. They're just hoping that the unions won't challenge it. And they may be right.

SWAPA needs to get ready to start playing traditional labor relations hardball. The company certainly is.
Click to expand...


I dunno; you'd have to ask a lawyer instead of a pilot. Like I said, for the first 30-some odd years this requirement was also there. It's only been the last 5 or 6 or so that it's been totally amount-of-work related without an "perfect attendance" requirement.

I suppose the company's lawyers have already vetted this: saying it's an incentive to come to work, above and beyond any negotiated compensation, and they don't have to give it to anyone in the first place. To this, you'd probably argue that if they "give it to anyone, they have to give it to all," and maybe that might hold up in court. Like I said, ask a lawyer. But I suspect that since no one ever made this argument during the first iteration of the "perfect attendance" requirement, that it passes some legal muster. At any rate, if a court DID side with your lawyer PCL, I bet that the company would just pull the plug on the program, and no one would get anything. After all, it's their incentive program to get people to not miss work. They're not doing it out of the goodness of their heart because they don't think they're giving us enough compensation.

Bubba
 
SWA Bubba said:
I dunno; you'd have to ask a lawyer instead of a pilot. Like I said, for the first 30-some odd years this requirement was also there. It's only been the last 5 or 6 or so that it's been totally amount-of-work related without an "perfect attendance" requirement.

I suppose the company's lawyers have already vetted this: saying it's an incentive to come to work, above and beyond any negotiated compensation, and they don't have to give it to anyone in the first place. To this, you'd probably argue that if they "give it to anyone, they have to give it to all," and maybe that might hold up in court. Like I said, ask a lawyer. But I suspect that since no one ever made this argument during the first iteration of the "perfect attendance" requirement, that it passes some legal muster. At any rate, if a court DID side with your lawyer PCL, I bet that the company would just pull the plug on the program, and no one would get anything. After all, it's their incentive program to get people to not miss work. They're not doing it out of the goodness of their heart because they don't think they're giving us enough compensation.

Bubba
Click to expand...

Much better said than I. You would think a union goon would easily understand this concept. I am glad he won't be representing my interests.
 
SWA Bubba said:
Where did you see this? I've heard in the past, that the company wasn't going to make either side's buddy passes interchangeable with the others. The company even came out and said this with the rationale that it wasn't worth the IT dept's time to change computer code to allow this, because of the "short time" before the companies were merged (seeing as how it takes about 2 years for the IT dept to make anything happen).

Bubba
Click to expand...

Swalife/swag faqs .pdf/ question 8.0


Can I use my guest pass on SWA or AT?

Both...
 
CaptAntoineMack said:
These passes are not a god given right or a negotiated item. It is a company policy they choose to give and legally could just take it all away.
Click to expand...

Yes, they can certainly take it away from everyone if they choose. And if they do, I would have no complaint. It would be SWAPA's fault for not negotiating the benefit into their CBA in the first place.

But what they can't do is treat someone differently based upon their use of FMLA or military leave.
 
humveedriver said:
Swalife/swag faqs .pdf/ question 8.0


Can I use my guest pass on SWA or AT?

Both...
Click to expand...


Thanks! Took me a while to find this, including reading TWO sets of FAQs. This of course, begs the question: "Why in the world is anyone at Southwest IT wasting any work time on doing anything OTHER than getting the new reservation system in place?!!"

Bubba
 
PCL_128 said:
Yes, they can certainly take it away from everyone if they choose. And if they do, I would have no complaint. It would be SWAPA's fault for not negotiating the benefit into their CBA in the first place.

But what they can't do is treat someone differently based upon their use of FMLA or military leave.
Click to expand...


Like I said, I'm not a lawyer... I just gave my opinion based on past practices. I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

Bubba
 
SWA Bubba said:
Thanks! Took me a while to find this, including reading TWO sets of FAQs. This of course, begs the question: "Why in the world is anyone at Southwest IT wasting any work time on doing anything OTHER than getting the new reservation system in place?!!"

Bubba
Click to expand...

Because they can run "world of Warcraft" and write the code for the guest passes simultaneously. Working on the reservation system doesn't allow for running multiple programs.
 
humveedriver said:
Swalife/swag faqs .pdf/ question 8.0


Can I use my guest pass on SWA or AT?

Both...
Click to expand...
Wow. Maybe we should ask if they can use their Buddy Passes on US, if we can finally use our benefits on THEM.

Supposed to be a "streamlined" policy...

But what they can't do is treat someone differently based upon their use of FMLA or military leave.
Click to expand...
Correct.

Doesn't matter if it's a negotiated item or a company policy, FMLA and USERRA don't make that distinction. It'll get changed to comply, just a matter of someone filing the complaint eventually.

It irritates me that they've changed the buddy pass program for SWA employees to travel on AirTran, but not vice-versa. That's not a computer programming issue if it can be used on us. I'm guessing it's part of the code-share changes that allow tickets to be sold interchangeably that also allows the Buddy Pass to be electronically processed, which means it WILL work both ways... if they want it to.
 
PCL_128 said:
Blatant violation of FMLA and USERRA. They're just hoping that the unions won't challenge it. And they may be right.

SWAPA needs to get ready to start playing traditional labor relations hardball. The company certainly is.
Click to expand...

Dude you kill me.

Someone with only a HS diploma ranting about law and torts.

My question is, do you actually believe what you spew?
 
slaquer5 said:
Dude you kill me.

Someone with only a HS diploma ranting about law and torts.

My question is, do you actually believe what you spew?
Click to expand...

I know. Right?

There is nothing discriminatory about rewarding production. Calling in sick when you are sick is a good choice. Working in the reserves is a choice. FMLA is a choice. Giving away flying so you can establish yourself in another line of work so you don't have to step foot on SWA property is a choice.
 
So the unicorns have left the barn and it's being run by regular airline management? As long as you know what and who your dealing with, that's fine.
 
Flash said:
So the unicorns have left the barn and it's being run by regular airline management? As long as you know what and who your dealing with, that's fine.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was the biggest shock I think. Once I realized what was really what behind the smiles and frosty adult beverages, I've been able to wrap my head around how it all went down in the end.

That said, we have 2 1/2 more years to go... waiting for the other, other, other, OTHER shoe to drop. lol ;)
 
Lear70 said:
Yeah, that was the biggest shock I think. Once I realized what was really what behind the smiles and frosty adult beverages, I've been able to wrap my head around how it all went down in the end.

That said, we have 2 1/2 more years to go... waiting for the other, other, other, OTHER shoe to drop. lol ;)
Click to expand...

Am I the only one that is picking up Lears passive aggression towards SWA?
 
Dash Power said:
Am I the only one that is picking up Lears passive aggression towards SWA?
Click to expand...
Probably, because I'm not being passive-aggressive.

I very clearly stated my unhappiness with the new Pass Bureau policy, and I've very clearly expressed my dissatisfaction in the past with the way the SLi was handled by management.

I'd say that's pretty open, which isn't passive-aggressive in any way, shape, or form, but thanks for chiming in. You take care now, mkay? (THAT is passive-aggressive sarcasm, by the way).
 
Lear70 said:
Probably, because I'm not being passive-aggressive.

I very clearly stated my unhappiness with the new Pass Bureau policy, and I've very clearly expressed my dissatisfaction in the past with the way the SLi was handled by management.

I'd say that's pretty open, which isn't passive-aggressive in any way, shape, or form, but thanks for chiming in. You take care now, mkay? (THAT is passive-aggressive sarcasm, by the way).
Click to expand...

Case in point.

Are you going to work with PCL_128?
 
Last edited:
CaptAntoineMack said:
Case in point.
Click to expand...
That's not case-in-point... He accused me of being passively aggressive towards Southwest when, in point of fact, I've been pretty open about my unhappiness on many different levels. Been trying to let it go, but when something new comes out like it did today, giving you guys something of ours without reciprocating for us, it doesn't help fix that now does it?

Passive-Aggressive towards some of the idiots on this board...? That's another issue entirely. Some of you people really make it a part-time job trying to stir the pot. I have neither the patience nor the time for that.

Are you going to work with PCL_128?
Click to expand...
I already work with PCL. Have for years. What are you trying to ask?
 
Remington said:
So is everything between AT and SWA pilots cooling down?
Click to expand...

What you are seeing here is nothing more than keyboard tough guys talking smack and acting childish. (Me included)

I don't know if things are cooling down or not. But what I can say is that all the AAI crews I have run into have been nothing but nice and I have gone out of my way to extend the same courtesy. The vast majority of us are simply pawns in this game. What would the purpose serve for me to get mad at an AAI pilot? They didn't have any hand in this acquisition. They just fly the metal. That being the case I have no axe to grind with them at all.
 
Remington said:
So is everything between AT and SWA pilots cooling down?
Click to expand...
If it weren't for some of the pot stirrers who attack individual people rather than the issues,,,?

Then yes, it seems to be cooling down. Most people are in the "acceptance" phase and trying to find their happy place, with varying degrees of success, sometimes varying day to day. ;)
 
Lear70 and PCL128 will never admit they help cost the AirTran pilot group hundreds of millions of dollars and alot of beneficial fences that would have helped blunt some of the seniority list pain. Not only did their actions cost the AirTran pilot group alot of money and QOL, but their actions also caused a DFR lawsuit that could end up costing ALPA tens of millions.

A simple pilot vote on SIA #1 would have been the proper way to poll the AirTran pilots (not having MEC reps try and do some unscientific polling through emails). A pilot vote also would have removed almost all chance of ALPA getting sued for breach of DFR.
 
maxblast72 said:
Lear70 and PCL128 will never admit they help cost the AirTran pilot group hundreds of millions of dollars and alot of beneficial fences that would have helped blunt some of the seniority list pain. Not only did their actions cost the AirTran pilot group alot of money and QOL, but their actions also caused a DFR lawsuit that could end up costing ALPA tens of millions.

A simple pilot vote on SIA #1 would have been the proper way to poll the AirTran pilots (not having MEC reps try and do some unscientific polling through emails). A pilot vote also would have removed almost all chance of ALPA getting sued for breach of DFR.
Click to expand...

Sad, but true. I would also point out that Gary Kelly should have never signed an agreement that he never intended to follow.
 
Last edited:
maxblast72 said:
Lear70 and PCL128 will never admit they help cost the AirTran pilot group hundreds of millions of dollars and alot of beneficial fences that would have helped blunt some of the seniority list pain. Not only did their actions cost the AirTran pilot group alot of money and QOL, but their actions also caused a DFR lawsuit that could end up costing ALPA tens of millions.

A simple pilot vote on SIA #1 would have been the proper way to poll the AirTran pilots (not having MEC reps try and do some unscientific polling through emails). A pilot vote also would have removed almost all chance of ALPA getting sued for breach of DFR.
Click to expand...

And the other side will never admit that threatening our jobs to vote on an SLI that they used management to ram down our throats, instead of a Real negotiated SLI or arbitration ruined a lot of our careers and cost us millions. That is the sad truth.
 

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