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

[-9Capt]

Here's a question.....Why did Kelly want the SLI done so quickly?

Check out the last paragraph:



By Ben Mutzabaugh, USA TODAY

Southwest may have an "alternate plan" for AirTran if pilots at the latter vote against a deal to combine seniority lists with their Southwest counterparts.

That's according to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, where reporter Kelly Yamanouchi writes:

In an effort to encourage pilots to approve the deal, Southwest has raised the possibility of a Plan B: that AirTran may not fully integrate as planned into Southwest if the pilot proposal fails.

"If we receive a 'no' vote, it means that we cannot execute the original integration plan and we will have to reset," Southwest spokesman Paul Flaningan says in a written statement to the Journal-Constitution.

The newspaper writes the prospect of a Plan B "came up shortly after AirTran's pilots union leadership voted against an initial deal … ."

In that situation, Southwest CEO Gary Kelly expressed disappointment that the tentative deal on seniority was never put to AirTran's union membership for a vote.

For now, Southwest says it's continuing to integrate AirTran's operations.

But things might look different if Southwest does eventually resort to the newly reported alternate plan.

In that scenario -- which at least one analyst suspects is a negotiating ploy -- Southwest would continue to operate subsidiary AirTran as a separate operation , a move that would still give it access to AirTran's fleet, Atlanta hub and its international routes

But the Journal-Constitution reports such a plan could also set the stage for a "slow dismantling" of AirTran, perhaps similar to how Southwest handled its acquisition of now-defunct Muse Air in the 1980s.

When asked specifically about that passage, Southwest spokeswoman Beth Harbin told Today in the Sky:

I know there has been a lot of speculation. It's natural, I guess, during a time when a potential agreement is introduced, people are reading their way through it, and making conclusions. The Muse Air acquisition was 30 years ago. It was an approach. Not the only approach. We believe Pilots today have a fair offer to consider and are optimistic they will approve it.

Bloomberg News also picks up on the story, writing "keeping AirTran flying on its own would run counter to the goal of folding the discount carrier into Southwest, the biggest low-fare airline."

"I''m sure that's not what management planned when they acquired AirTran," Hunter Keay, an analyst at Wolfe Trahan & Co. in New York, says to Bloomberg. "It probably is to some degree a negotiating tactic."

The Bloomberg report makes no mention any possible dismantling of AirTran. Referencing the same summary cited by the Journal-Constitution, Bloomberg quotes Southwest as saying simply "Plan B calls for AAI (AirTran) and SWA (Southwest) to remain separate and unintegrated."

As for the background of the AirTran pilots' seniority issue, the Journal-Constitution says some AirTran pilots believe going to arbitration could net them a better deal.

Others, however, appear to be frustrated -- as evidenced by a Tuesday move to recall three union leaders amid what the Journal-Constitution writes is "discontent over the union leadership decision to decline the first offer."

As for Southwest, spokeswoman Beth Harbin tells Bloomberg: "Our focus is going to be on getting the deal with the pilots done quickly because that really does set a good momentum for the rest of the integration."

 

[madjack]

Good question...the company has gotten everything it has wanted, as a stock holder, that is good news, stronger combined company, while divesting of an unwanted airframe at minimal cost...and the real feather in the cap is both pilot groups overwhelmingly agreed to the deal... I am completely sympathetic to the current DRC involving the fall out of the flush bid...I think GK, will break out the check book...but it is tough to listen to someone like PCL malign everyone who disagreed with him... It was a catastrophic miscalculation on the MECs part to deny the mbrship a vote...all words and opinions on this matter do not takeaway from the truth that we would not be byatching on an anonymous forum today if your mbrship had voted in SL9...the issue of pay, ATL, and CP seats would be moot... You cannot deny this fact, it was a horrible mistake in hindsight, the leadership should not have gambled...the 717 leaving early was facilitated by the demise of SL9... Good luck with the DRC..

 

[SWA Bubba]

So ALPA should have disregarded the will of its dues paying membership and capitulated to the demands of SWAPA and Gary Kelly?

Absent arbitration, the only option would have been accepting a less than favorable SLI. ALPA did what the majority of the membership was telling them to do. The first agreement was an insult and it was rightfully rejected by the MEC. For some reason GK feels he has a right to influence our union proceedings and was insulted when he didn't get his way. That was when he picked up a big stick. Screw him and his airline.

We could all argue this forever, and no one will see the other's side. Plus, since it was settled one way, nobody on either side knows what would have happened if we had gone down the other path. You can guess and bluster all you want, but you don't know for sure.

However, having said that, there's something you said that I don't think is believable. You said that "the majority of the membership was telling" the MEC to reject the first AIP. Right? If that was really the case, that the MEC thought the deal would be rejected by the membership, then they most certainly should have allowed a vote. Then you would have gotten the arbitration you obviously wanted. I believe that the only way we were going to see arbitration was if an agreement actually went to a vote, and one side or the other voted it down. GK couldn't have been more clear about that--that he wanted every pilot to be able to vote. When the AirTran MEC indicated that it wasn't going to "play ball," he essentially forced them to play and have a membership-wide vote.

I think the opposite of your supposition was true--the MEC probably felt that their constituents would vote to accept, and they thought they could get more their way. So they didn't allow a vote. I even think PCL would agree--he's always implying your membership are collectively sheep.

Ironically, if the first AIP went to a vote, I think there's a reasonable chance that the SWA side might have voted no. Then Gary would have gotten the vote he wanted, and your MEC would have gotten the arbitration it wanted.

Anyway, not that any of that matters now.

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

If that was really the case, that the MEC thought the deal would be rejected by the membership, then they most certainly should have allowed a vote.

Haven't we discussed this before? Maybe that was with someone else. But the reason they didn't want to send it out, even knowing that it would die a resounding death, was that the Process Agreement contained some hard deadlines for when the different phases began, and a ratification process that was doomed for failure would have eaten up all of the prep time for mediation/arbitration. We would have had a failed AIP, then immediately rushed into mediation without prep time.

I think the opposite of your supposition was true--the MEC probably felt that their constituents would vote to accept, and they thought they could get more their way. So they didn't allow a vote. I even think PCL would agree--he's always implying your membership are collectively sheep.

No, I actually disagree. The cowardice of the membership didn't rear its ugly head until after GK sent out his mildly threatening letter the week after the MEC voted down the TA. Prior to that, the pilot group was at least 3-1, probably 4-1, opposed to the deal, and demanding that the MEC vote it down. The anger that the deal was even reached was palpable. But as soon as GK started throwing around some "scary" words, a lot of people got weak in the knees. A lot more than I ever would have expected, especially after a 98% strike vote just a year prior.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Haven't we discussed this before? Maybe that was with someone else. But the reason they didn't want to send it out, even knowing that it would die a resounding death, was that the Process Agreement contained some hard deadlines for when the different phases began, and a ratification process that was doomed for failure would have eaten up all of the prep time for mediation/arbitration. We would have had a failed AIP, then immediately rushed into mediation without prep time.



No, I actually disagree. The cowardice of the membership didn't rear its ugly head until after GK sent out his mildly threatening letter the week after the MEC voted down the TA. Prior to that, the pilot group was at least 3-1, probably 4-1, opposed to the deal, and demanding that the MEC vote it down. The anger that the deal was even reached was palpable. But as soon as GK started throwing around some "scary" words, a lot of people got weak in the knees. A lot more than I ever would have expected, especially after a 98% strike vote just a year prior.

Sorry, obviously I still don't agree with your characterizations, but thanks for at least being civil about the fact that we don't see eye to eye on what happened or might have happened.

Bubba

 

[-9Capt]

GK couldn't have been more clear about that--that he wanted every pilot to be able to vote.

That's fine, he can want whatever he wants to want...but wasn't his decision to make, it was ours. He stuck his nose into our union process which doesn't bode well for establishing a good, lasting employee relationship. Like I said before, our piss poor attitude shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

[SWA Bubba]

That's fine, he can want whatever he wants to want...but wasn't his decision to make, it was ours. He stuck his nose into our union process which doesn't bode well for establishing a good, lasting employee relationship. Like I said before, our piss poor attitude shouldn't surprise anyone.

Well, you can certainly run your union any way you want, but running the airline (or airlines) how he wanted to, or felt he needed to, WAS his decision to make, whether you want to believe that or not. And obviously, you can have any attitude you want, but fortunately, every FAT guy I've run into so far has had a great attitude. The only piss-poor attitudes I've seen (from either side, for that matter) have been on this board. So far, so good.

Bubba

 

[-9Capt]

You'll prob start seeing more as the pissed off ones are forced over.

 

[scoreboardII]

Probably not. Talk is cheap, once we are all one big happy family, even at the bar the most you might get is one guy claiming he was more screwed than the other, then they both realize they both got screwed, and drink happily ever after. Will someone take it to an extreme? Sure, there's always one in every crowd. Will most feel screwed forever? Sure. But in the end they will realize that pilots had zero to do with how this played out.

 

[-9Capt]

Then someone please explain to me how SW pilots guys got screwed. Whenever someone says that, all I hear is...850 new upgrades and an across the board bump in seniority wasn't enough...or...your seniority loss wasn't enough...

 

[PCL_128]

You'll prob start seeing more as the pissed off ones are forced over.

I hear the CP's office got a call recently asking why the latest class of AirTran pilots was so "unenthusiastic." I think they're in for a rude awakening for the rest of the transition. The happy-go-lucky guys who all pissed their pants with glee at the thought of being a SWA employee all went over as soon as they could. That's what they've been seeing for the most part for the first year of the transition. Now they start getting everyone else, and they'll see just how their piss-poor employee relations towards us really affected things.

 

[PCL_128]

Sorry, obviously I still don't agree with your characterizations, but thanks for at least being civil about the fact that we don't see eye to eye on what happened or might have happened.

I actually have no problem being civil towards 99% of the SWA pilots. Hell, I'd happily buy a beer for the guys on the SWAPA MC. I have no animosity there. It's just the handful of guys who can't help but be completely arrogant a-holes. Guys like waveflyer and canyonblue. They deserve nothing but derision. As best I can remember, you've never behaved like them, so we're cool.

 

[madjack]

Not enough time for Arby prep, so that's why no vote...even SWAPA isn't that unprepared for negotiations...

 

[HowardBorden]

So ALPA should have disregarded the will of its dues paying membership and capitulated to the demands of SWAPA and Gary Kelly?

ALPA did what the majority of the membership was telling them to do. The first agreement was an insult and it was rightfully rejected by the MEC.

Is this the same overwhelming majority that recalled their union representatives for not sending AIP1 out for membership ratification?

On Tuesday, AirTran pilots voted in favor of recalling three of their union leaders, amid discontent over the union leadership decision to decline the first offer.

http://www.ajc.com/news/business/southwest-raises-possibility-of-alternate-plan-for/nQMdG/

 

[PCL_128]

Is this the same overwhelming majority that recalled their union representatives for not sending AIP1 out for membership ratification?

On Tuesday, AirTran pilots voted in favor of recalling three of their union leaders, amid discontent over the union leadership decision to decline the first offer.

http://www.ajc.com/news/business/southwest-raises-possibility-of-alternate-plan-for/nQMdG/

You conveniently ignore the fact that none of this recall nonsense started right after the vote. It only came after Gary started making the public veiled threats. The pilots were fine with the MEC's vote (except for a tiny minority of pilots) until Gary made them piss their panties.

 

[HowardBorden]

You conveniently ignore the fact that none of this recall nonsense started right after the vote. It only came after Gary started making the public veiled threats. The pilots were fine with the MEC's vote (except for a tiny minority of pilots) until Gary made them piss their panties.

So you're telling me the same "MAJORITY" that was screaming don't put AIP1 out for a vote, was the "MAJORITY" that voted to recall the union representatives for not putting AIP1 out for a vote? You can obviously see how that seems completely counterintuitive right?

 

[PCL_128]

So you're telling me the same "MAJORITY" that was screaming don't put AIP1 out for a vote, was the "MAJORITY" that voted to recall the union representatives for not putting AIP1 out for a vote? You can obviously see how that seems completely counterintuitive right?

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so. People flip-flopped faster than John McCain trying to win an election.

 

[HowardBorden]

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so.

And you are so fond of claiming that SWAPA lacks integrity, unbelievable!

 

[maxblast72]

The cowardice of the membership didn't rear its ugly head until after GK sent out his mildly threatening letter the week after the MEC voted down the TA. Prior to that, the pilot group was at least 3-1, probably 4-1, opposed to the deal, and demanding that the MEC vote it down. The anger that the deal was even reached was palpable. But as soon as GK started throwing around some "scary" words, a lot of people got weak in the knees. A lot more than I ever would have expected, especially after a 98% strike vote just a year prior.

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

 

[Kenney G]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

Didn't the MCO and MKE reps poll each one of their pilots in base to come up with their no vote?

Oh yeah, 76% of statistics are made up on the spot.

 

[maxblast72]

Didn't the MCO and MKE reps poll each one of their pilots in base to come up with their no vote?

Oh yeah, 76% of statistics are made up on the spot.

One MCO FO I flew with said his rep called him and asked "Do you want me to turn this POS down?"

I don't know if that qualifies as useful polling.

 

[maxblast72]

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so. People flip-flopped faster than John McCain trying to win an election.

I believe most pilots demanded a recall because they thought the MEC had lied to pilot group prior to their August 18, 2011 vote on SIA #1. Here is an email from a line pilot to the MEC on September 5, 2011 (and this guy used to be one of the more radical guys on our forum):

​

"All,

As new information comes to light regarding AIP1, I become more and more disturbed, disgusted, saddened, angry, and mistrustful of any of you.

I'll start by admitting that I encouraged all of you to vote 'no' to AIP1. It seems that was a mistake. It now appears that I encouraged you to do something that I was, at best, only partially (mis?)informed about. I can certainly say that a lot of facts were missing that are now surfacing. Facts that may have changed my opinion (and that of many pilots) had I known them two weeks ago. I can not say whether this was something that any of you did intentionally. If so, I find that criminal. Withholding very critical, important information when asking us to make such an important decision is irresponsible and negligent. Why? With probably the most important career decision many of us would ever have to make. Why did you not tell us the whole story?

None of us yet knows how this will turn out, nor how the terms of AIP2 will look. But it is likely that the 'lying by omission' from the parties who knew (MEC, MC) will end up costing many of us many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. How sad if it turns out this way.

In retrospect, it was my mistake to trust any of you to make full disclosure of what was truly at stake. I won't make the same mistake again. Whatever AIP2 contains, it MUST be voted on by the pilots. There must be full disclosure of all terms, conditions, and restrictions. There MUST be full disclosure of all risks, threats, perceptions of threats, and potential consequences. It must all be laid out clearly and plainly on the table, so that all of us can make the best decision for ourselves and our families, as it now seems none of you can be trusted to do so.

Start communicating, start leading, start earning back our trust.....before it's entirely too late...please......"

 

[PCL_128]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

The same S/T who never showed up to meetings?

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

The same S/T who wasn't even allowed by the MEC to go to the Dallas meeting?

You aren't exactly using good sources, here. But that's typical of you.

 

[HowardBorden]

The same S/T who never showed up to meetings?



The same S/T who wasn't even allowed by the MEC to go to the Dallas meeting?

You aren't exactly using good sources, here.

You have to admit, he backs up his words with actual quotes from the people in question. Whether you like it or not, these seem to be actual quotes from actual ALPA officers. They may not be flattering, but I don't hear you disputing the quotes as accurate or their veracity as spoken by said ALPA officers.

 

[400ADude]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[PCL_128]

You have to admit, he backs up his words with actual quotes from the people in question. Whether you like it or not, these seem to be actual quotes from actual ALPA officers. They may not be flattering, but I don't hear you disputing the quotes as accurate or their veracity as spoken by said ALPA officers.

Quoting private emails is inappropriate. He should know better, but he's practically a sociopath, so it's not surprising that he doesn't.

What I dispute is that the people he quotes would have any idea. They were detached from the process, and the pilots don't communicate with the non-voting officials, by and large. The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do. And anyone present at the meeting that day, where several hundred pilots showed up to speak, would know that the opinion in the room was at least 3-1 opposed to sending the deal out for a vote. That's not just based upon the people who spoke. There was actually a show of hands. It was overwhelmingly opposed to the deal going out. But maxblast conveniently "forgets" that.

 

[madjack]

Informal polling and a show of hands in a room full of pilots seems like pretty shoddy union work....hopefully u will be better prepared for the DRC Arby...good luck...

 

[HowardBorden]

Quoting private emails is inappropriate. He should know better, but he's practically a sociopath, so it's not surprising that he doesn't.

What I dispute is that the people he quotes would have any idea. They were detached from the process, and the pilots don't communicate with the non-voting officials, by and large. The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do.

Quoting private e-mails may be inappropriate, but you do understand these quotes have been made part of the public record when they were entered as evidence in a lawsuit, correct?

"The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do." It would seem that the hundreds upon hundreds of constituents that voted to remove the very representatives that made that decision from office would disagree with that statement.

 

[canyonblue]

Now they start getting everyone else, and they'll see just how their piss-poor employee relations towards us really affected things.

I just can't wait to see it! On the other hand, I believe we will see nothing, since past practice hasn't shown any results.

 

[PCL_128]

Quoting private e-mails may be inappropriate, but you do understand these quotes have been made part of the public record when they were entered as evidence in a lawsuit, correct?

The lawsuit is still in the discovery phase, and no public docket is available. Furthermore, I don't know if these emails have even been submitted as exhibits in the depositions. It's likely that they're just emails that maxblast has. Something submitted in discovery by the defendant but not submitted as evidence by the plaintiffs is not part of the public record.

It would seem that the hundreds upon hundreds of constituents that voted to remove the very representatives that made that decision from office would disagree with that statement.

Since the emails are all stored on the ALPA server, they can disagree all they want, but facts are facts. If the lawsuit does go to trial (unlikely), you'll see just how many of these people flip-flopped.