What are you, anyway, a March 2010 hire? You have a whopping 14 months on the line at AAI, and you're the expert. :laugh:
Wow. How many of the last 14 months have you been on the line at AAI?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What are you, anyway, a March 2010 hire? You have a whopping 14 months on the line at AAI, and you're the expert. :laugh:
:beer:Actually, the proper name is....Mexico.
I hope the AT MC has the guts to put this on the table. I know it would pass. It just seems the logical way to come together without hurting each others' feelings. Sure the angry 12 would complain about it, but who the f%&k cares. they had their day 2 weeks ago.
Ty,
We have over 250 Captain training events every month!PT/PC is not a Captain training event. Just a recurrent. No one can put out 250 fresh captains a month. You got 14 sims running 24 hours a day? because that's what it would take.
Actually more than 14, or no one would take recurrent checkrides that month.
I like it! Sitt 'n' back and havin a bhruski! Enjoying the ride watching tranny self destruct! Pop, there goes another AAhhhh!!!If you want to make posts against your own team, Tokyo Joe, perhaps you ought to get your facts straight.
We did propose giving up some junior CA seats, about 250 of them. SWA management did not want that to happen because of all of the training events it would trigger, as displaced 737 CA bid 717CA, displaced 717CA bid 737FO, etc.
What are you, anyway, a March 2010 hire? You have a whopping 14 months on the line at AAI, and you're the expert. :laugh:
"Juan" Valdez is a joke! Step down "my friend"!And in 2 weeks, you'll once again post "Wow. Just wow." followed by "It's ON.". Then the same posted in Nov once the Arby's menu is printed.
Some of the SWA pilots posting here this weekend were saying that SWAPA would not negotiate in good faith.
Ty,
We have over 250 Captain training events every month!PT/PC is not a Captain training event. Just a recurrent. No one can put out 250 fresh captains a month. You got 14 sims running 24 hours a day? because that's what it would take.
Actually more than 14, or no one would take recurrent checkrides that month.
I said training events, not Captain upgrade.
Among others, that was just a couple of days ago, CaptWidgeon. If SWAPA is "really" not going to negotiate, why did they invite the AT team back to Dallas for further negotiations? That is not bargaining in good faith.There really isn't any "negotiating" going on anymore. The sides are meeting and some "offers" may cross the table, but nothing will happen. Swapa is done giving and the Tran boys are feeling too entitled. It will go to arbitration, period. The only remaining question is what will GK do? I have a pretty good idea it will not be what the AirTran pilots want to have happen. We shall see. To bad it's going to crash and burn when it could have been a very successful acquisition.
Yes, they definitely promised a staple or near-staple. It's not exactly a secret, it's been in the news and was even discussed on the SWA pilots' own message board.
I don't understand why SWAPA made that promise. Surely they knew that SWA pilots would expect them to follow through with it.
Nindiri,
I think you are confusing yourself. The AT MC already agreed to a deal. The MEC, who by the way directs the MC, decided to vote no. So who is negotiating in bad faith?
Sorry, obadie, but the staple promise is an established fact. That's why the junior SWA pilots were so angry that the proposed SLI was a complete staple. You can read about it on your own SWA pilots' message board.
Among others, that was just a couple of days ago, CaptWidgeon. If SWAPA is "really" not going to negotiate, why did they invite the AT team back to Dallas for further negotiations? That is not bargaining in good faith.
Prove what? That the radical SWA FO's were not happy with the SLI? That's pretty easy, just look back at all the posts complaining about it being too generous to AT pilots.
Sorry, obadie, but the staple promise is an established fact. That's why the junior SWA pilots were so angry that the proposed SLI was not a complete staple. You can read about it on your own SWA pilots' message board.
I think you misunderstand me. I am in no way suggesting that trying to negotiate a staple was unethical or dishonest; if that was what SWAPA wanted to negotiate, that is their right. But I confess that I am surprised that they would openly promise a staple to their pilots and stir them up in support of it, with such a poor chance of actually achieving it. Now, having promised a staple or near-staple and being unable to deliver, they have backed themselves into a corner and have to deal with their own angry pilots who understandably want to know why SWAPA did not deliver on the promise.What do you continue to call it a staple when it was not. I will admit it's a moot point, but you need to be more honest and forthright.
The drama created by emotional statements are misleading, factually incorrect and frankly Immature.
If I need to define a staple, I will be more than happy to. I'm giving you more respect than that and the benefit of the doubt.
I think you misunderstand me. I am in no way suggesting that trying to negotiate a staple was unethical or dishonest; if that was what SWAPA wanted to negotiate, that is their right. But I confess that I am surprised that they would openly promise a staple to their pilots and stir them up in support of it, with such a poor chance of actually achieving it. Now, having promised a staple or near-staple and being unable to deliver, they have backed themselves into a corner and have to deal with their own angry pilots who understandably want to know why SWAPA did not deliver on the promise.
Sorry, obadie, but the staple promise is an established fact. That's why the junior SWA pilots were so angry that the proposed SLI was not a complete staple. You can read about it on your own SWA pilots' message board.
Spinning the agenda?
No, I don't think so. I am simply answering questions as they come to me, and asking a few of my own. And, I might add, without resorting to invective or name-calling, unlike some of the more radical SWA members here and their crude sycophants like Andy.
CaptWidgeon, I think your argument here needs to be with your own SWA pilots. I'm simply repeating what they posted about SWAPA having no intentions of really negotiating even though they invited the AT team back to Dallas ostensibly for that purpose. If you disagree, you need to talk to them, not me.
More importantly, your above post is in poor taste. You should not be posting actual names of anonymous members here.