SWAPA/ATN process agreement update

[Kharma Police]

Geez Kharma, we were specifically told that the exact languange in question was the language that your guys put in there. One small part, not the whole document. So I'll say it again: the part that your lawyers have a problem with is the...part...that...you...put...in...there.

SWAPA is NOT deserving of this statement:



And you know it.

"IF" what your Union says is true, then why would they care if one of our lawyers decided to change a few items in the agreement? The specifics of the meeting entailed that the agreement was subject to review. Why (again) the harsh tone directed at our Union?

 

[Kharma Police]

You say that in jest but I hear we don't even need a process agreement. Maybe Swapa did let you write it all because they don't really care whats in it within reason.

Your lawyers couldn't even write your own language right. I'm curious if your attorneys billed you for the language they insisted on in December and then billed you again when they insisted their own language couldn't stay. This is like watching a train wreck only more sad. Good luck guys, you are going to need it.

I appreciate your sincere concern for our welfare.

 

[ivauir]

The MUTUAL agreement was subject to review by BOTH parties. We just wanted to sleep on it and have another set of lawyers look at it. They found what SWAPA didn't want us to find and all of a sudden (once again) ALPA is the bad guy. Rather than face the membership and say we got caught, SWAPA goes on the offensive and accuses ALPA of dragging their feet and being difficult. Again, CLASSY!!!!!!

Kharma,

This line of thinking would make sense if:
- It was a simple language issue to capture the intent at the table
- The language wasn't inserted by ALPA
- This was December.

To be clear, SWAPA has made no accusations. President Chase issued a simple statement of fact. We are all free to draw our own conclusions.

 

[Skyboy722]

"IF" what your Union says is true, then why would they care if one of our lawyers decided to change a few items in the agreement? The specifics of the meeting entailed that the agreement was subject to review. Why (again) the harsh tone directed at our Union?

Our union doesn't care, and neither do I. But you don't need to attack swapa over this, it was alpa's mistake, and a pretty small, insignificant one at that. There's nothing wrong with fixing a mistake. The only thing amusing here is your refusal to admit Alpa made a mistake at all, and instead attack swapa?

Again, WTH?

 

[Bob Dylan]

Wow. Obviously more silly games from the Trannies.

No way will these pilots groups ever be integrated! I see a preferential interview type scenario happening. It's becoming clear why Southwest is hiring pilots!

 

[Kharma Police]

Our union doesn't care, and neither do I. But you don't need to attack swapa over this, it was alpa's mistake, and a pretty small, insignificant one at that. There's nothing wrong with fixing a mistake. The only thing amusing here is your refusal to admit Alpa made a mistake at all, and instead attack swapa?

Again, WTH?

I have no proof other than an email published by your Union regarding what "they say" happened. Regardless of the reasons, our Union lawyers wanted to make a change and your Union took exception to that fact. I will ask again, if both parties agreed to the fact that the document is subject to review, then why was SWAPA annoyed that we did so? They have managed to sidestep the issue by "saying" that it was our own language that we wanted to change but yet they don't clarify why they had a problem with the change and continue to negotiate in public.

 

[bravodude]

"IF" what your Union says is true, then why would they care if one of our lawyers decided to change a few items in the agreement? The specifics of the meeting entailed that the agreement was subject to review. Why (again) the harsh tone directed at our Union?

Dude, judging by your reaction you really care and thats great but why are you the only one allowed to show any emotion, from your comments the AT pilots should care and we SWAPA should just be lucky to be graced by your presence. Sorry it doesn't work that way, emotions run high on both sides. I used to think you one of the level headed AT guys but I guess I was wrong. You can complain all you want I am done with FI. (AGAIN!)

 

[Kharma Police]

Dude, judging by your reaction you really care and thats great but why are you the only one allowed to show any emotion, from your comments the AT pilots should care and we SWAPA should just be lucky to be graced by your presence. Sorry it doesn't work that way, emotions run high on both sides. I used to think you one of the level headed AT guys but I guess I was wrong. You can complain all you want I am done with FI. (AGAIN!)

I have no issue with the Southwest pilots. I do however have some concerns regarding the tone and tactics of SWAPA, just like many SWA pilots have similar concerns with ALPA. My apologies if I have been overly outspoken and with any perceived negative candor that I might have exhibited.

 

[BlueBlood]

I do however have some concerns regarding the tone and tactics of SWAPA,

As you should....because they aren't representing you, they represent the other side.

 

[On Your Six]

I have no issue with the Southwest pilots. I do however have some concerns regarding the tone and tactics of SWAPA, just like many SWA pilots have similar concerns with ALPA. My apologies if I have been overly outspoken and with any perceived negative candor that I might have exhibited.

Just look at how SWAPA treated the Frontier guys. It's good your lawyers are being careful.


OYS

 

[Lear70]

Squirrel!!!!!

+1



I think I'll wait to find out WHAT, EXACTLY the language was that evidently was deemed offensive enough to throw a wrench in the works for before I decide whether to get irritated or not.

YMMV

 

[Speedtape]

Our union doesn't care, and neither do I. But you don't need to attack swapa over this, it was alpa's mistake, and a pretty small, insignificant one at that. There's nothing wrong with fixing a mistake. The only thing amusing here is your refusal to admit Alpa made a mistake at all, and instead attack swapa?

Again, WTH?

Hmm--Alpa would have only made a mistake had they not corrected the issue. There is always some administrative house cleaning when creating complex legal documents--especially when there is a chess game in progress. If it was no big deal, then why would you care?

There is alot of history that should raise caution for Airtran pilots, who are still represented by ALPA. It started with Muse Air, then Morris, and then Frontier. Has the leopard changed his spots?

 

[ivauir]

+1



I think I'll wait to find out WHAT, EXACTLY the language was that evidently was deemed offensive enough to throw a wrench in the works for before I decide whether to get irritated or not.

YMMV

Lear,

I understand you've got to back your team, but the tone and tactics (thanks Kharma) are worth addressing. Notifying SWAPA through an ALPA Communication to their membership is deliberately provocative.

I truly hope this is a tempest in a teapot, but it is ludicrous that we are still negotiating over how to negotiate ...

 

[Speedtape]

Lear,


I truly hope this is a tempest in a teapot, but it is ludicrous that we are still negotiating over how to negotiate ...

It is not absurd, ridiculous, or laughable! Nor is it a public game. A well constructed bi-lateral transition agreement is a critical piece in maintaining a meaningful, constructive, and orderly process for SLI that follows a time line to reach an end goal. Who would build a house without a good set of detailed plans and a finish line? Is your career not just as important?

This process is the cornerstone for a successful SLI that is equitable for both parties. It requires attention to detail and due diligence. Without a good preliminary agreement, with both parties committed to common goals, the SLI would be a runaway passenger train where no one can get off. Do you want a reserved seat?

 

[FIREMAN]

It is not absurd, ridiculous, or laughable! Nor is it a public game. A well constructed bi-lateral transition agreement is a critical piece in maintaining a meaningful, constructive, and orderly process for SLI that follows a time line to reach an end goal. Who would build a house without a good set of detailed plans and a finish line? Is your career not just as important?

This process is the cornerstone for a successful SLI that is equitable for both parties. It requires attention to detail and due diligence. Without a good preliminary agreement, with both parties committed to common goals, the SLI would be a runaway passenger train where no one can get off. Do you want a reserved seat?

Careful, people around here do not take to logical thinking .