Three longtime SWA pilots all saying the same thing and in total agreement does not seem like "crap" to me. It sounds like there is a possibility of truth. It was relevant to the discussion so I passed it on.
Like I said, if the letter you claimed really existed, it would have been posted on this board within the hour of it being sent out. You know that. Two seconds of thought on your part, and you would have realized it. Yet you seem to have wanted it to be true so you could insert it in a discussion that basically was between SWA guys and Airtran guys. And we know which side of that discussion (or any similar one) you're on, whether you have any facts or not.
Since this blew up last night, I also talked with a friend who I flew with at Scenic years ago that has been at SWA for about 4 or 5 years. He said that he thinks SWAPA is in for a fight for your next contract. He's pretty sure that management will ask for "efficiencies" in your work rules and a pay freeze if not a cut. He thinks in the end that you won't take a pay cut but there will be little or no raises. He also thinks your work rules will take a hit. He does not see it being a win but at best a neutral outcome. I've known this guy since 1999. Should I call what he tells me crap because it's different from your opinion?
I didn't so much primarily respond with an opinion, but rather pointed out that there was NO SUCH LETTER. I suspect that your friend, being a 4-5 year FO, is one of the group feeling the brunt of the integration woes, falls into the category of disgruntled and/or pessimistic. He's entitled to his opinion, which may be different than my own, but if he tells you that management has asked for pay cuts or concessions, then YES, you can tell him it's crap, because it hasn't happened.
I was not gloating about anything. I have nothing to gloat about. And if you go back and search my posts, I have never called for the demise of SWA. Nor have I ever said it wasn't a good job or a good place to work. I have pointed out some short comings but I have also pointing out shortcomings at my own airline. What I have done is pointed out the "holier than thou" attitudes of certain SWA pilots on this board that seem to think anyone not at SWA shouldn't dare have an opinion contrary to theirs.
Really? Here's your initial quote (although SWADude beat me to it):
I just jumped in a SWA cockpit. They were talking about a letter all the pilots got from management saying that the company was getting ready to ask for pay cuts and concessions.
Maybe it's not going to be such a big pay raise for the AT guys....
I bolded the personal commentary part of your quote that cried out as gloating. Jeez, all it lacked was a big smiley face. In truty, even if SWAPA payrates stayed the same, it's still a big raise from ALPA rates.
General Lee, "that guy", etc.? I happen to think General Less has had some very valid points. I think you are as much "that guy" as you claim General Lee or I am being. You can not take anyone posting anything other than praise for SWA. You immediately attack anyone that does. Maybe you should also reexamine your posting history and try to emulate the General's new philosophy.
I never said that General Lee never had valid points. He often does. However, if you think that everything he posted that was SWA-negative was a rational, valid point, then YES, you are becoming "that guy." Because even the General admitted that he was over the top on a lot of occasions, and was going to tone it down. I suppose you don't want him to?
I don't care if you praise SWA or not. I understand that Airtran guys have valid complaints, and don't blindly defend everything SWA does. I've mentioned and seconded SWA's crappy IT department and other inefficiencies. The only time I gave the General crap was about his over-the-top stuff. And the only time I ever "attack" anyone is to address blatant falsehoods, like the existence of the so-called "pay cut and concessions" letter that you so proudly introduced into a SWA-Airtran argument. One, by the way, that initially involved neither you nor me.