SWA today like the airline in the book, "Nuts!"?

[waveflyer]

I understand Ty, and I'm glad there are people that like them. I'm on the opposite end of that equation.

I'll take the early van (not sure I've ever seen a 4:30 one though...ouch)and three legs to base by Noon. I live in base, so I'm in my house by 1pm with drink in hand by the pool. If you commute, your on your flight by 2pm typically.

To each there own. I like a half day off on my last day with no need for a nap.

You headed this way soon?

If you live west some of those 5am reports are really 2am-
Red-eyes are much easier for the PMer west crowd than east coast AMs

 

[Kharma Police]

You're thinking FedEx there champ-
http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/cargo/united_parcel_service

I don't mind the loud ties, but yeah- that leather jacket needs an update(!)
Bad

The fact that UPS doesn't have any wide-bodies (757 aside) has no bearing, you are correct, I was wrong. You may have won this round Wave, but I'll be back!

 

[Kharma Police]

Your posts always make me laugh


SBII,

So what are you saying the pay should be for Q 400. ?

Thanks man, respect knuckles to you.

 

[scoreboardII]

I'm not sure we disagree... Yet.

I want a rate set for whatever widebody we MAY get- I just want that new rate blended in to everyone's pay scale -

If you want a legacy type subset of widebody pilots who individually get paid much more than the rest of us- then yes; we disagree and I hope our pilot group is WISER than that.

Not a horrible concept, but very unwieldy. Imagine the formula to compute that, then the steps required to verify the company keeps the fleets at an agreed level, flown at an agreed level. I think we would do it, but the company would only go for it if it heavily favored them. As in, our top rate is $189 now, pilots determine a blended rate is $180, but the company wants $160 to be safe. I also think anyone at the top tier pay rate will scoff any attempt to lower their "I got mine" top rate, which is 100% of our captains. So chances of a blended rate at SWA, zero.

 

[waveflyer]

The fact that UPS doesn't have any wide-bodies (757 aside) has no bearing, you are correct, I was wrong. You may have won this round Wave, but I'll be back!

Probably not my man-
Bc 1/3 of their fleet are those 75 757's - they only have 162 of all those other widebody models

 

[waveflyer]

Not a horrible concept, but very unwieldy. Imagine the formula to compute that, then the steps required to verify the company keeps the fleets at an agreed level, flown at an agreed level. I think we would do it, but the company would only go for it if it heavily favored them. As in, our top rate is $189 now, pilots determine a blended rate is $180, but the company wants $160 to be safe. I also think anyone at the top tier pay rate will scoff any attempt to lower their "I got mine" top rate, which is 100% of our captains. So chances of a blended rate at SWA, zero.

I have no idea what you're talking about
Seriously-
I'm not talking about changing anything about our current payscale or taking away rewards of being topped out or senior-
I'm just saying we set a rate for the widebody and combine it in with our 737 rates-
Lets just make math easy - we buy 50 787's- new rate $250 a trip- 700 737's at $200/trip= blended rate for all pilots of $203.33
(X-50*$250=$12,500; Y-700*$200=$140,000; $140k+$12.5k=$152,500/750 a/c= $203.33 tfp)
If we eventually get 300 wide bodies, then that's $215tfp

It's about unity within our union which will lead to better contracts- and QOL, not chasing the damn carrot our whole career filling up the training department with unnecessary events as pilots inevitably go for the money- (and money almost always leads to pride and separatism in our union) - the pilot group still captures the productivity of the larger plane- and yes I know it gets severely diluted for the individual by our masses of 737 narrowbodies- but you have to think big picture-

If you're 62, what kind of flying do you want to do? Would you like a choice? Or do you want to purposefully set up a situation where you have to fly wide in order to capture the full value of your career?
I don't.

With separate pay rates, only pilots who choose to fly wide and are senior enough to hold the widebody a/c will ever capture the full value of the SWA career-
A blended rate ensures that EVERY pilot will capture the full value no matter what choice they make or what their seniority holds-
I'm young and that's a good thing- way more secure

 

[slaquer5]

I have no idea what you're talking about
Seriously-
I'm not talking about changing anything about our current payscale or taking away rewards of being topped out or senior-
I'm just saying we set a rate for the widebody and combine it in with our 737 rates-
Lets just make math easy - we buy 50 787's- new rate $250 a trip- 700 737's at $200/trip= blended rate for all pilots of $203.33
(X-50*$250=$12,500; Y-700*$200=$140,000; $140k+$12.5k=$152,500/750 a/c= $203.33 tfp)
If we eventually get 300 wide bodies, then that's $215tfp

It's about unity within our union which will lead to better contracts- and QOL, not chasing the damn carrot our whole career filling up the training department with unnecessary events as pilots inevitably go for the money- (and money almost always leads to pride and separatism in our union) - the pilot group still captures the productivity of the larger plane- and yes I know it gets severely diluted for the individual by our masses of 737 narrowbodies- but you have to think big picture-

If you're 62, what kind of flying do you want to do? Would you like a choice? Or do you want to purposefully set up a situation where you have to fly wide in order to capture the full value of your career?
I don't.

With separate pay rates, only pilots who choose to fly wide and are senior enough to hold the widebody a/c will ever capture the full value of the SWA career-
A blended rate ensures that EVERY pilot will capture the full value no matter what choice they make or what their seniority holds-
I'm young and that's a good thing- way more secure

You left out the lower pay scale GK would be using for the Q 400 in your math .

SWA would have more Q400 than 787s

 

[jball2]

Sounds a little socialist to me. Not hatin, just sayin.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jonjuan]

Sounds a little socialist to me. Not hatin, just sayin.

Yes she is. You just figured out her political leanings?

 

[Kharma Police]

Probably not my man-
Bc 1/3 of their fleet are those 75 757's - they only have 162 of all those other widebody models

Did you not read my post?, I said you were correct. With that one pay scale that you champion at UPS (with the same pay for flying that tiny little 757), they still have pilots on furlough. You are quite an expert on UPS, a little trouble in paradise got you thinking about what brown can do for you if they hire again?

 

[PCL_128]

Sounds a little socialist to me. Not hatin, just sayin.

Probably why I agree with wave on something for once.

 

[PCL_128]

So what is ALPAs excuse? 5 years of fighting at AirTran and at the end of the day the company was sold and the negotiation wrapped up when management decided.

As someone else pointed out, ALPA was only here for 18 months when we got our CBA. The joke that was the NPA allowed negotiations to drag on for the other 3.5 years. ALPA basically started from scratch, did a complete re-write of our Scheduling section, and got it all done in 18 months.

Lets talk about the contract:
1. Caved on scope

You mean improvements on scope. Scope is more than seat limits. It's also merger protections. But you gave those away because you were a coward, didn't you?

2. Industry trailing rates even with a massive FO raise

Actually, industry standard rates.

3. The same reserve system as ASA (SureJet or whatever they are)

Not even close.

4. Yes it was better than the old contract. That is like saying the Pittsburgh Steelers are better than Jacksonville this season.

I only like this statement because it ridicules the Steelers, which will drive maxblast up the wall. But in reality, our CBA was an enormous step forward, and brought us in line with other major carriers. Was it what it would have been if we hadn't had our leverage pulled out from under us by Southwest? No, we did have to give up on likely additional gains because of that.

The strike vote you brag about is the same strike vote taken at every airline during contract talks. It always passes by 98% and ALPA sends out some rah rah email saying "the company knows we mean business". I think ALPA drafted the letter in 1968.

I don't brag about it. I consider it a joke. The same pilots who voted 98% to go on strike and actually shut down their airline pissed their pants and folded like a cheap lawn chair just a few months later when there was virtually no chance that their airline would actually be shut down, just because Gary made some veiled non-credible threats.

My guess is GK called and said something like "wrap up the labor issues"... then we got a contract.

Really? That would be illegal. So you're saying that Gary is a criminal. I mean, I see worse things written on the bathroom wall in ATL, but still not very nice.

 

[SWA Bubba]

I only like this statement because it ridicules the Steelers, which will drive maxblast up the wall. But in reality, our CBA was an enormous step forward, and brought us in line with other major carriers. Was it what it would have been if we hadn't had our leverage pulled out from under us by Southwest? No, we did have to give up on likely additional gains because of that.

You know, I could be wrong, but from reading some of these comments over the past year, it almost seems like PCL doesn't like Maxblast or something.... Almost.

Ah..., I'm probably imagining this....

Bubba

 

[madjack]

"Was it what it would have been if we hadn't had our leverage pulled out from under us by Southwest?"

Whatever

 

[redflyer65]

"Was it what it would have been if we hadn't had our leverage pulled out from under us by Southwest?"

Whatever

Exactly!

 

[madjack]

Had a pro standards guy on the JS, and he had some interesting insights...

- back in the day of shorter upgrade time, most of the pro standard issues were with the CPs, but since "it is hard to hide your inner a-hole for 10+ years" the Pro-stan issues are 50-50 split between the seats...

- there was one fist fight between an FAT and a RSW FO, a while back...

- there have been issues with RSW flying with FAT...did not elaborate...

- His opinion: Company is waiting for the integration to be complete, and then will look to make an example of someone on the RSW and FAT side...right now the FATs have a longer rope than the RSWs...but that will change when the transition is complete.

Better play nice, just passing this along...

 

[waveflyer]

Sounds a little socialist to me. Not hatin, just sayin.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

Please.

What the hell do you think seniority is? If we're going to be loose with the term and all...?

 

[waveflyer]

You left out the lower pay scale GK would be using for the Q 400 in your math .

SWA would have more Q400 than 787s

Hypothetical as it is- you're right-
Lets say it gives us all $170/trip in my equation-
Still better than outsourcing- and I loved the turboprop flying I did- if it makes SWA money, ill fly the hell out of that thing

 

[waveflyer]

Did you not read my post?, I said you were correct. With that one pay scale that you champion at UPS (with the same pay for flying that tiny little 757), they still have pilots on furlough. You are quite an expert on UPS, a little trouble in paradise got you thinking about what brown can do for you if they hire again?

Nope.

You?

 

[Kharma Police]

Nope.

You?

No, I'm not down with brown.