SWAPA/ATN: Why no JCBA?

[ivauir]

AT pilots have shown on multiple occasions that they care about the entire group, much like SWA I'm sure. When we were furloughed in before the holidays in 07, they donated money to a furloughed pilot fund, bought toys for furloughed pilot's kids, and created a fund to support contract hostages, all in addition to what Ty mentioned.

One of our senior Capt's personally sent my family gift cards valued at hundreds of dollars to help with Thanksgiving and Christmas. I can honestly say that the AT group is a loyal, fun, and professional group of aviators.

That is the spirit that will make this work!

 

[Cruncher]

Carl,

good to hear that story. We have not have had the challenge of dealing with our brothers and sisters on furlough. I believe you'd see that from SWA guys as well.

 

[carl p]

Amen Carl P. I was one of those unlucky club 169 members and I also received help from some of our generous Captains and Fo's. I will correct you on your dates though it was 08. CJ spearheaded that program and called all of us personally. We do have a good group. Not to say we don't have our token 10% but all in all a great bunch of guys and gals.

Yep, your right it was 08. My bad.


It is the "get r done" spirit of AT pilots (in spite of difficult circumstances) that gives me hope when the dust settles the new SWA will be a stronger company. I have many friends on the WN side and I know that spirit has been the secret to their success as well.

 

[bluesideup1]

Actually, that's exactly what the SEC filings say. But that doesn't really matter, because that's what our contract requires. A merger of the two carriers is required within 18 months of corporate closing.

What contract are you refering too? Is it the TA that just came out? I don't remember you having a 18 month closing date in your previous contract.

If your 18 month closing date is in the current TA then how is it enforceble after the purchase announcement?

If you think that a contract is capable of that then I have a couple side letters I would like to suggest to SWA and SWAPA.

P.S. The SWA contract will be controlling (unless you don't want better pay, benefits, schedules.) So, even if you think it is enforcable how much do you want to bet your 18 months will end up on the the cutting room floor after we finish the transition agreement?

 

[luv2fly]

PCL, For your sake you should hope Kry Baby Katz has more in his bag of tricks than convincing you guys that your TA has any bearing on this deal. His track record isn't the best.

 

[Quiet Flight]

So much misinformation and so many uninformed pilots out there... It's shameful.

 

[roughneck]

Actually, that's exactly what the SEC filings say. But that doesn't really matter, because that's what our contract requires. A merger of the two carriers is required within 18 months of corporate closing.

Your TA:
"In the event of a transaction in which another US certificated Air Carrier that operates aircraft with more than 86 seats........."

So, What type aircraft does Guadalupe Holdings fly? I'm thinking your 18 month window wouldn't even begin until and if Guadalupe Holdings (or Sub LLC) are ever merged with SWA. If SWA ever merged with Sub LLC then your 18 month window would start at that point.

Before you start trying to quote your "Common Management Control" language you need to go back and reread it. It only applies to transferring A/C not integrating flight operations.

 

[Lear70]

Your TA:
"In the event of a transaction in which another US certificated Air Carrier that operates aircraft with more than 86 seats becomes an affiliate of the company (merger transaction)...."

So, What type aircraft does Guadalupe Holdings fly? I'm thinking your 18 month window wouldn't even begin until and if Guadalupe Holdings (or Sub LLC) are ever merged with SWA. If SWA ever merged with Sub LLC then your 18 month window would start at that point.

Before you start trying to quote your "Common Management Control" language you need to go back and reread it. It only applies to transferring A/C not integrating flight operations.

You're reading the wrong section, my friend.

The section you are quoting (1.E) is if another air carrier is purchased by AirTran and whether or not they have to be merged into our operation. If they operate ANY aircraft with more than 86 seats, they get merged and that section details how. If they don't operate an aircraft with more than 86 seats, they can be operated separately but have to adhere to the Section 1.C limits on how many planes can be operated separately.

What you are looking for is Section 1.D.1 and 2 and 1.F:

Paragraph 1.D.1: "This agreement shall be binding on any Successor or Assign... defined as an entity which acquires all or substantially all of the assets or equity of the Company."

Paragraph 1.D.2. "The Company shall require that the successor or assign, prior to the closing of the transaction, commit in writing to adhere to the provisions of this agreement."

Section 1.F: "Acquisition or Disposition of Assets".

Paragraph 1 Requires the company to negotiate as best they can to secure the employment of the pilots as part of the transaction. They've already done that; it's part of the public SEC filing, includes the employees as part of the transaction, so the "best efforts" language has already been complied with, and in our case DOES include the pilots as both SEC filings and M/B require (assuming integrated ops with the M/B requirement).

It also refers back to 1.E.2 for the 18-month requirement and the process of integration per A/M.

You're also trying to insinuate that by AirTran being acquired by another "entity", that it somehow negates the provisions in this agreement. Even if we disregarded the simple FACT that SEC filings specifically involve Southwest and AirTran (it's not Guadalupe holdings who signed the SEC filings, it's Southwest), the attorneys disagree with your idea on this as well, so I think I'm going with the experts on this one.

The fact is, such talk isn't going to worry any of the AirTran pilots nor sway any opinions. In fact, it's only serving to ALIENATE a large portion of the AAI group who posts and/or lurks here. Do you really want to do that? If so, WHY???

You may be getting your coworkers to agree with you, and that's fine, as each company WILL represent their own interests until fully integrated, but by posting it here, for the pilots of the other air carrier to read, you're not convincing AirTran pilots, but rather just irritating them needlessly. I mean seriously, the idea that SWA pilots would be convinced by AAI pilots over their OWN union Board and MC is ludicrous, just as the idea that AAI pilots would be convinced by SWA pilots over our own MEC and MC is just as ludicrous.

Irritated people will dig their feet in on a debate and become hostile. Again, something we DON'T need. I understand people like Bob Dylan and Cometman who don't work at either carrier tossing a little gasoline on the fire, it's FlightInfo, that's normal ops here. But people who actually WORK for our carriers don't need to be poking each other in the eye with the proverbial stick, do we?

I know there's been a bit of that on BOTH SIDES of the aisle, so to speak, and I'm hoping that BOTH sides will quit doing that to each other, just relax about something we have ZERO control over, and try to get along with each other.

 

[GuppyWN]

That sounds pretty scary. I think we're screwed.

Gup

 

[Lear70]

That sounds pretty scary. I think we're screwed.

Gup

Can't tell if that's sarcasm or not...

If it's not,,,

I don't see it as either side being "screwed", just that fair integration is GOING to occur. Where "fair" lies is the only thing realistically up for debate, and I have faith that our Merger Committees can find that "sweet spot".

In the integration, some of us (myself included) may get our upgrade delayed by YEARS, and we're just gonna have to suck that up if it works out that way. Under the new T.A., that's going to cost me between $6,000 and $10,000 per year moving forward over SWA F/O rates. A DOH integration (if that's what happens) would put me 7-8 years from upgrade instead of 1 1/2-2 (staying stand-alone AAI) or 2 - 2 1/2 (relative seniority). That's a loss of over $100k (stand alone AAI) and over $200k (relative seniority) corrected for the present value of money and inflation once I would upgrade at SWA and make that back, assuming Southwest continues to grow 7-8 years from now, a difficult assumption to make in Aviation, but a realistic "educated gamble" based on Southwest's past.

Nothing to do about it, and being angry about it only hurts ourselves. Have to balance the loss of that income (and the enjoyment of being in the left seat) with the (likely) better Quality of Life and combined carrier long-term growth opportunities and stability.

I understand some Southwest pilots may not feel the same way, and I would never tell someone that they're not entitled to their opinion, even if I disagree with it. That's the American way. Just hope we can all work together peacefully and happily, regardless of our personal feelings about it. To me, that's the definition of "being a professional". Do your job, take care of your people, take care of your customers, try to have a good time doing it, even though sometimes that's easier than others because of outside stressors,,, like this one.