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

[K-Mart]

You guys need your forum back...

I think it's fine. Let them hash it out. It's anonymous here.

 

[waveflyer]

Cool- just a reminder that only the dumbest of FI members actually post- 330 replies, 10,000+ views-

 

[wood pecker]

The swapa forum seems pretty heated as well. Very similar to the AT forum from attacking the union, putting down each other, insulting another airline, reserves sucks, senior people stole vacation etc... The ones that put down AT are no different than the ones on the AT forum who posted negative stuff about SWA, they are venting and that helps them cope. Free therapy let them post.

From what I gather is that even though reserves sucks no one will give up anything to change it, especially since new hires are coming. Retirement changes will be sold as it helps everyone from first to last on the list but we had to give up a piece of the negotiating pie so reserves will continue to suck. Oh and since a few maximize premium time and make a crap load that will change by hiring more people to ensure the supply and demand are balanced just like the AT schedules gradually started to make less and less. More guys in demand of TFP = less supply of premium trips.

I am very glad I crossed and everyone has been awesome. I was never given a stack of cash on a turn at AT to go buy the whole crew lunch. I do think there is a serious culture disconnect from what is going on in the employee newsletters to what is happening on the line. If you only read the emails it seems the only issue confronting SW is what to dress up as for the Halloween party. Maybe it's just the negotiating cycle is never pleasant at any airline.

 

[Ty Webb]

What planet were you living on in early 2012? The Merger Committee Vice Chair and PCL128 went round and round on the AirTran forum about SIA #1/#2 for weeks.

We captured the whole discussion. The ALPA attorneys were thrilled to see all those discussions in print during the first 4 depositions. I am sure Lee Moak is glad PCL128 is out there running his mouth on public forums all day long. That keeps ALPA's exposure to a minimum.

You wrote the above, yet you don't grasp that your actions on this public forum could be exposing you to a lawsuit?

Even more importantly- the lawyers defending ALPA members are being paid for by ALPA. Yes, tens of thousand of ALPA members are paying dues money, in part to defend against your spurious lawsuit.

Now, here's where it gets really interesting-

If someone (say a group of pilots) were to sue YOU for your postings on here, ALPA will not defend you. You are operating completely on your own, and you'll be on the hook for your own lawyers and experts and expenses.

Funny that a guy who thinks he's so smart can be so f'in dumb. I'll put up the first $1,000. It will be cheap entertainment.

 

[maxblast72]

You wrote the above, yet you don't grasp that your actions on this public forum could be exposing you to a lawsuit?

Even more importantly- the lawyers defending ALPA members are being paid for by ALPA. Yes, tens of thousand of ALPA members are paying dues money, in part to defend against your spurious lawsuit.

Now, here's where it gets really interesting-

If someone (say a group of pilots) were to sue YOU for your postings on here, ALPA will not defend you. You are operating completely on your own, and you'll be on the hook for your own lawyers and experts and expenses.

Funny that a guy who thinks he's so smart can be so f'in dumb. I'll put up the first $1,000. It will be cheap entertainment.

Just be ready for the defamation countersuit.

If the MEC did the right thing on August 18, 2011, why are you so against emails and notes taken during that time period coming out? Why did the former Communications Chair turned MEC Chair who happens to be one on the most respected union guys at AirTran ever spearhead the recall effort of the 3 ATL MEC reps that voted to shoot down SIA #1?

 

[fam62c]

It would have been implemented, because we had a Process Agreement that required it. AAA/AWA? Not so much. Their agreement only required implementation after a JCBA.

This has all been debated for a couple of years now, and your concerns all answered. You should have been paying better attention before you voted away your rights and your seniority.

I know this is a difficult concept for you to consider but what if you were wrong? You may have been willing to put it all on the line and roll the dice on some untested written language but the majority of your group was not because they simply could not afford to be wrong. Maybe if you were a decade or so older with a family to support and had been on the street before in this industry you would see things differently. Idealism is something you can afford when you are young, realism is something you accept as you gain experience in life and get put through the wringer a few times.

Having a job at SW even at lower relative seniority and/or in the other seat and possibly even another base may be a bitter disappointment to the pilots at AT who are affected the most but it is far better than having no job and having to start over with no longevity, year-one pay and QOL IF you can find another job. You are obviously in a situation where you can afford to walk away from a 130K+ job at SW and go do something else that you would rather do anyway. Given that, you had little or nothing to lose if you bet the farm and lost. How many people are in that situation? All I'm asking is that you take a minute and consider pilots other than yourself for a change.

 

[Ty Webb]

Just be ready for the defamation countersuit.

If the MEC did the right thing on August 18, 2011, why are you so against emails and notes taken during that time period coming out? Why did the former Communications Chair turned MEC Chair who happens to be one on the most respected union guys at AirTran ever spearhead the recall effort of the 3 ATL MEC reps that voted to shoot down SIA #1?

What I'm against, you imbecile, is that this is a public website.

If you haven't noticed, I haven't responded to any of the crap you have posted on here, not because you are right, but because it is not the appropriate venue for that. We had an appropriate venue, which was shut down when you refused to stop posting privileged information.

Notice that not one of the people you refer to are making posts on a public forum. Not one member of the Merger Committee. Not one member of the Negotiations Committee, not one member of the LEC, not the "former Communications Committee".

Just you, showing your ass.

 

[madjack]

Maybe no ones posting from MC cause they have lives...

 

[PCL_128]

Why did the former Communications Chair turned MEC Chair who happens to be one on the most respected union guys at AirTran ever spearhead the recall effort of the 3 ATL MEC reps that voted to shoot down SIA #1?

He didn't. That's another lie. He helped write communications pieces for them. He was not the one spearheading it. And by the way, he thinks you're a nutcase.

 

[PCL_128]

I know this is a difficult concept for you to consider but what if you were wrong?

Everything in bargaining is about weighing risk and making value judgments about what is and isn't posturing. Unless you're willing to undergo that exercise, you might as well not even take part in bargaining. Just get down on your hands and knees, lick the boots of the other side, and grovel for whatever they'll give you. Maybe you find that to be an acceptable way to go through life, but I don't.

 

[waveflyer]

You're all in ARENT you PCL?

Every response I see out of you is defensive based on you royally screwing the AT pilots you plan on leaving.

I agreed with you earlier- now....it's max's time- as a fellow guy who earns much more outside of aviation than I do in it- I find your exuberance ridiculous- your life doesn't depend on aviation- as much as I beg pilots from all sectors of the industry to have solid backups- I understand that most do not and aren't as free to roll the dice...

 

[fam62c]

Everything in bargaining is about weighing risk and making value judgments about what is and isn't posturing. Unless you're willing to undergo that exercise, you might as well not even take part in bargaining. Just get down on your hands and knees, lick the boots of the other side, and grovel for whatever they'll give you. Maybe you find that to be an acceptable way to go through life, but I don't.

No matter what anybody says you will always believe that if your group had stayed the course and taken SW on head-to-head that somehow "right" (or what you believe is right) would have prevailed and you would have ended up with a much more favorable list that would have been crammed down the throats of the SW pilots as the companies were fully integrated. I don't believe that would have happened and the majority of your group didn't believe it either but maybe you are right, we will never know for sure. What I do know for sure is that the consequences for your pilot group would have been catastrophic if you had been wrong.

 

[PCL_128]

What I do know for sure is that the consequences for your pilot group would have been catastrophic if you had been wrong.

Management made threats far more drastic than what Gary and crew were making here when we were in contract negotiations. Should we have caved then, too, because the "consequences...would have been catastrophic" if they hadn't been bluffing? Of course not. Leaders make judgment calls based upon experience. The leadership determined then that the threats were nothing but posturing, so negotiations continued rather than leaking it to the pilot group and getting everyone scared. But when the merger talks come around, an inexperienced and gullible MC pisses their pants, leaks standard run-of-the-mill threats to the membership, then the membership pisses their pants, and leverage evaporates overnight. This is not leadership, and it's certainly not very smart.

Again, if you aren't willing to call someone's bluff on the most outlandish of threats, like shutting down an airline you just purchased when the law is clearly on our side, then you might as well not even engage in bargaining and just get right to begging.

 

[humveedriver]

Management made threats far more drastic than what Gary and crew were making here when we were in contract negotiations. Should we have caved then, too, because the "consequences...would have been catastrophic" if they hadn't been bluffing? Of course not. Leaders make judgment calls based upon experience. The leadership determined then that the threats were nothing but posturing, so negotiations continued rather than leaking it to the pilot group and getting everyone scared. But when the merger talks come around, an inexperienced and gullible MC pisses their pants, leaks standard run-of-the-mill threats to the membership, then the membership pisses their pants, and leverage evaporates overnight. This is not leadership, and it's certainly not very smart.

Again, if you aren't willing to call someone's bluff on the most outlandish of threats, like shutting down an airline you just purchased when the law is clearly on our side, then you might as well not even engage in bargaining and just get right to begging.

Says the guy who has no intention of sticking around. Why don't you give me 10,000 dollars of your own money and I'll go to Vegas with it? I appreciate your passion, but you have NO life experience (kids, marriage, manager of say 50+ people), these things matter too. I know you believe the words you say, but they are mostly meaningless until you have a lived a little more life. IMO anyway, I know you will find folks who agree with you and those are the voices you will listen too.

 

[maxblast72]

We had an appropriate venue, which was shut down when you refused to stop posting privileged information.

No, the ATN forum was shut down because of all the personal attacks and occasional threats of violence. Maybe if pilots like yourself could debate without calling people names we would still have a forum today.

Notice that not one of the people you refer to are making posts on a public forum. Not one member of the Merger Committee. Not one member of the Negotiations Committee, not one member of the LEC, not the "former Communications Committee".

None of the people you mentioned have access to all 335,000 pages of documents and have attended 4 out of first 5 depositions taken.