SWAPA/ATN: Why no JCBA?

[Lear70]

I haven't heard anyone in the union come out and say "We will not be on SWA pay until we have an agreed SLI".

What they HAVE said is that we will not have SWAPA REPRESENTATION, meaning we will remain ALPA, until the SLI is complete, simply because it would bring DFR issues to be negotiating against the same group that is supposed to represent us. Have to stay separate until all the union issues are complete and agreed to.

When we go on SWA pay is purely a function of what SWA management and SWAPA come up with and is part of the "bridge agreement" (since some people don't want to call it a JCBA - whatever, same animal, different name). That bridge agreement will cover what the 717 will pay, when we go on SWA pay rates, SWA work rules, SWA flight and duty limits, SWA bidding, uniforms, etc, etc, etc.

It could be like DAL/NWA which happened on DOCC or it could be when the SLI is complete or it could be anywhere in between. Total mystery until that part of the puzzle comes out of Dallas. They *COULD* use it as a carrot/stick, but given the SWA management culture, I somewhat doubt it...

Golden opportunity for SWA management to show AirTran pilots how their culture works. Hope we all keep level heads, good attitudes, and open minds and git er done!

 

[Sy-bill]

And it appears they have the ability to drag that out for almost two years (18 months after Corporate closing).

This time line from the one being acquired really has no leverage. It has much more leverage from the acquiring airline. A simple staple approved by Swapa until the issue is finalized would satisfy this requirement. But more likely would be to violate that item in your contract and let it go to court for a couple more years.

At least on this forum you continually hear the AT pilots think that M/B will give them relative seniority, or close to that, and this must be accomplished in 18 months. I can appreciate your hoping this is all true but its not real. Too many variables to accurately predict your new career seniority to simplify it as such.

 

[Cometman]

Golden opportunity for SWA management to show AirTran pilots how their culture works. Hope we all keep level heads, good attitudes, and open minds and git er done!

Do you think that SWA management would be more interested in showing 1700 pilots from AirTran how their culture works or to show 6000 SWAPA pilots how they intend to keep their culture? Just curious.

 

[Ty Webb]

This time line from the one being acquired really has no leverage. It has much more leverage from the acquiring airline. A simple staple approved by Swapa until the issue is finalized would satisfy this requirement..

You're out of your mind. We can be operated separately until SLI, but if you think there would be a "temporary staple" until that time, someone has already stapled your temporal region.

 

[Cometman]

You're out of your mind. We can be operated separately until SLI, but if you think there would be a "temporary staple" until that time, someone has already stapled your temporal region.

I thought you said that they can only operate AirTran as a seperate airline for 18 months because of your contract. After 18 months the deal would be off.

 

[Lear70]

Do you think that SWA management would be more interested in showing 1700 pilots from AirTran how their culture works or to show 6000 SWAPA pilots how they intend to keep their culture? Just curious.

I would think they would strive for both. Implementing AAI pilots into SWA pay sooner rather than later would be a great step for establishing the new employees' relationship while simultaneously showing the existing SWA pilots that there will be no whipsawing with a "B" scale which has been so detrimental to the industry.

The downside is limited to the cost involved for doing so in payroll expenses. There aren't really any other downsides to doing so UNLESS they plan to take the carrot/stick approach. Assuming, of course, that there isn't some legal prohibitive reason in the Southwest CBA that I haven't heard about (and, admittedly, I haven't read their CBA in its entirety).

Time will tell.

 

[Cometman]

I would think they would strive for both. Implementing AAI pilots into SWA pay sooner rather than later would be a great step for establishing the new employees' relationship while simultaneously showing the existing SWA pilots that there will be no whipsawing with a "B" scale which has been so detrimental to the industry.

The downside is limited to the cost involved for doing so in payroll expenses. There aren't really any other downsides to doing so UNLESS they plan to take the carrot/stick approach. Assuming, of course, that there isn't some legal prohibitive reason in the Southwest CBA that I haven't heard about (and, admittedly, I haven't read their CBA in its entirety).

Time will tell.

That all sounds good. However, if that would not have any effect on that 18 month thing I keep hearing about in AirTran's contract why would SWAPA be in any hurry to get a SLI done? I would think AirTran would be in a hurry to complete the SLI to get things moving ahead. I believe somebody said that SWAPA can extend the 24 month deal they have. Would the AirTran deal be over if it goes beyond 18 months? If so, can you extend the 18 Months or is the deal dead at the end of the 18 month period? One other thing, after the close of the deal wouldn't all growth and new aircraft go to the SWA side?

 

[Lear70]

That all sounds good. However, if that would not have any effect on that 18 month thing I keep hearing about in AirTran's contract why would SWAPA be in any hurry to get a SLI done? I would think AirTran would be in a hurry to complete the SLI to get things moving ahead. I believe somebody said that SWAPA can extend the 24 month deal they have. Would the AirTran deal be over if it goes beyond 18 months? If so, can you extend the 18 Months or is the deal dead at the end of the 18 month period? One other thing, after the close of the deal wouldn't all growth and new aircraft go to the SWA side?

Well, I'm not an attorney, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, however, a few general business issues to address in those questions:

1. An 18 month (or 24 month) moratorium "or the deal is dead" doesn't work with publicly-traded companies. On Date Of Corporate Closing (DOCC), Southwest will own AirTran, through its wholly-owned temporary subsidiary (Guadalupe Holdings). There is no way to "undo" that purchase from the shareholder's perspective. Southwest spends the money, there aren't any refunds.

2. SWA *CAN* operate the airlines COMPLETELY separately, but there's no financial incentive to do it (quite an incentive to combine as soon as possible, actually), and the DOT and DOJ approval comes from statements of combined operations. I imagine they'd be under anti-trust scrutiny if they failed to do so, barring some 9/11 event that constituted an "Act of War" or "Act of God". If they DO combine operations, they can't spin off AAI or Guadalupe and must combine the seniority lists per B/M.

3. An extension would have to be agreed upon by the AirTran MEC (18 month), as a side-letter waiving or amending that portion of our CBA.

4. An extension on the SWAPA side (24 month), should that be determined to be the governing ruling (not going to get into that argument again, just discussing the possibility of it being the governing time span), would have to be agreed to by SWAPA. Obviously, if it behooves them to do so in the SLI argument, they might try it, but B/M is pretty specific in that once one side requests arbitration, there's not a huge leeway in time for it to be conducted, so if either side files for arbitration, there's not much either union or either airline's management can do except comply with the arbitrator's requests and decisions, barring some kind of UAir/AWA filing, and we see how well THAT has worked out.

5. My *PERSONAL* belief is that all future deliveries after DOCC will come to the Southwest side of the house. Reason being: there's simply no reason to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to change out interiors and livery with a new delivery; what a waste of money *THAT* would be. Yes, it will likely stagnate the AirTran growth after DOCC as those hulls go to Southwest for the 12-18 months while the companies are integrated, and quite a few SWA F/O's will upgrade sooner than expected out of the deal. Not great for AAI senior F/O's on the cusp of upgrade, especially if it DOES take a while to transition over to SWA pay and work rules, as that's a year and more losing out on CA pay by deliveries going to SWA. Hopefully they'll recoup that money on the back-side of their career earnings after SWA upgrade, present value of money notwithstanding, but we all know there are no guarantees on the future in the aviation world.

Just my personal thoughts on the matter, non-vetted through an attorney or either side's union leadership, so it's worth what you paid for it.

 

[roughneck]

The downside is limited to the cost involved for doing so in payroll expenses.

To the tune of about $13,000,000 a month for the pilots of AT to come to the SWA contract. That is a pretty compelling reason for SWA to not want to bring them over early.

 

[Lear70]

To the tune of about $13,000,000 a month for the pilots of AT to come to the SWA contract. That is a pretty compelling reason for SWA to not want to bring them over early.

True enough. Nothing for us to do but sit back and wait to see what happens. :beer:

 

[27 driver]

That all sounds good. However, if that would not have any effect on that 18 month thing I keep hearing about in AirTran's contract why would SWAPA be in any hurry to get a SLI done? I would think AirTran would be in a hurry to complete the SLI to get things moving ahead. I believe somebody said that SWAPA can extend the 24 month deal they have. Would the AirTran deal be over if it goes beyond 18 months? If so, can you extend the 18 Months or is the deal dead at the end of the 18 month period? One other thing, after the close of the deal wouldn't all growth and new aircraft go to the SWA side?

Question Cometman. How does it benefit SWAPA to delay the SLI. If they force the company to operate us separately it could backfire. Not saying it will but it could. At some point money trumps culture. If SWAPA plays hardball too much any future growth could go to the AAI side because it will be at a cheaper cost. Airplanes could be delivered in Southwest livery and seat config while operated by Guadaloup holdings. Easy to put a sticker on the door stating XYZ inc. DBA ABC. Does either side prefer that scenario? Not a shot but a question. It would not cost the company an extra dime to do it that way. It would actually be cheaper as they would operate under our contract. Is that not incentive for both groups to gitr done. We have to keep in mind that the shareholders will steer the ship. Not the unions.

 

[roughneck]

any future growth could go to the AAI side because it will be at a cheaper cost.

Nope. All future growth will be on the SWA side.

 

[airlinepilot]

Why would SWAPA delay or slow the SLI process......it all depends on what the pilot group considers important to us. SWAPA has polled the group and I think the poll did a good job is raising most of the points that are important to us. I am sure they will use the polling data to position any agreement on a SLI

 

[Cometman]

Question Cometman. How does it benefit SWAPA to delay the SLI. If they force the company to operate us separately it could backfire. Not saying it will but it could. At some point money trumps culture. If SWAPA plays hardball too much any future growth could go to the AAI side because it will be at a cheaper cost. Airplanes could be delivered in Southwest livery and seat config while operated by Guadaloup holdings. Easy to put a sticker on the door stating XYZ inc. DBA ABC. Does either side prefer that scenario? Not a shot but a question. It would not cost the company an extra dime to do it that way. It would actually be cheaper as they would operate under our contract. Is that not incentive for both groups to gitr done. We have to keep in mind that the shareholders will steer the ship. Not the unions.

I thought someody said that under the SWAPA contract that any increase in airframes would be something like 3.6:1. I guess that means if they increase Airtran by 1 aircraft they have to give SWA more than 3. I would think that the longer SWAPA can hold out the more the Airtran will want to settle. Now, if Airtran can request arbritration then the clock would start to run. Even if they use the full 18 months and then request it the process would take at least another 1-2 years to complete (especially if one side is trying to extend the process). That is a long time operating within a holding company without any growth.

 

[Dan Roman]

Golden opportunity for SWA management to show AirTran pilots how their culture works. Hope we all keep level heads, good attitudes, and open minds and git er done!

Do you think that SWA management would be more interested in showing 1700 pilots from AirTran how their culture works or to show 6000 SWAPA pilots how they intend to keep their culture? Just curious.

Bottom line is, if you think the SWA "culture" is important, this merger could easily ruin it if either group feels shafted.
It seems a lot on here are bashing the SWA folks, but from the side lines I can see their point. I would be upset too with AT guys slotting in ahead of me with a much latter date of hire. It would also be equally unfair for a SWA FO to think he should be taking an AirTran Captains seat.
Seems to me the way to go would be some kind of ratio formula with fences. Reality will probably be that it won't be the same SWA and they are testing uncharted waters. New culture and head to head competition with the legacies, who are becoming much stronger than they were in the past.
Piedmont and USAir were two of the better airlines in the country, until they merged that is.

 

[Lear70]

Piedmont and USAir were two of the better airlines in the country, until they merged that is.

True that. My dad was 23 years at USAirways, hired in '81, prior to Piedmont.

It was never the same airline after that, even as a kid growing up I could sense the tension in CLT, kind of a North/South thing, for nearly a decade.

Of course, the entire industry has changed (in my opinion, for the worse) over the years, which didn't help people's attitudes any, but the Piedmont/USAirways merger, while financially good for the companies at the time and the decade or so after that, certainly did nothing for the culture of the company.

I certainly hope to avoid that here, and end up with the Southwest culture when all is said and done. The vast majority of the AirTran pilots have that same "can-do" spirit (it got me in a lot of trouble at AirTran, actually), and I think with a little cultivating, that will be easy to draw back out of the employee group at AirTran. Just have to get past the growing pains...

 

[Cometman]

Bottom line is, if you think the SWA "culture" is important, this merger could easily ruin it if either group feels shafted.
It seems a lot on here are bashing the SWA folks, but from the side lines I can see their point. I would be upset too with AT guys slotting in ahead of me with a much latter date of hire. It would also be equally unfair for a SWA FO to think he should be taking an AirTran Captains seat.
Seems to me the way to go would be some kind of ratio formula with fences. Reality will probably be that it won't be the same SWA and they are testing uncharted waters. New culture and head to head competition with the legacies, who are becoming much stronger than they were in the past.
Piedmont and USAir were two of the better airlines in the country, until they merged that is.

Bottom line is, if you think the SWA "culture" is important, this merger could easily ruin it if either group feels shafted.

Especially if SWAPA is shafted. From reading here on FI I would think only half of the Airtran would be upset. like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys. So would SWA rather have 800 guys upset or 6800?

 

[27 driver]

Nope. All future growth will be on the SWA side.

And you know this for sure. There is no legal loophole to be exploited. I would bet there is. Once again I am not saying that will happen. I am saying it could.

 

[Dan Roman]

Nope. All future growth will be on the SWA side.

I would think if one side had lower operating costs than the other, it is the side with the lowest costs that would grow, other wise they could risk stock holder lawsuits.

 

[Lear70]

From reading here on FI I would think only half of the Airtran would be upset. like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

During T.A.'s 1 and 2, a good 1/3 to 1/2 of the senior pilots voted NO on a T.A. that would have given them pay raises but shafted the F/O's, partially because of Scope and work rule give-backs, but also, in large, because the F/O's were getting shafted.

Not to get into an argument about what T.A. 3 (technically 4) is doing to the senior guys, but the point is that the senior pilots don't ALL just have the "ME" attitude. Quite a few of them have proven just the opposite.

Carry on...

 

[Cruncher]

What are the big difference between TA 3 and TA 4? Can you post a wavetop recap?

 

[FlyinGuy]

And you know this for sure. There is no legal loophole to be exploited. I would bet there is. Once again I am not saying that will happen. I am saying it could.

It is in the SWAPA contract. SWA will not be able to grow AT without growing SWA at the 3.6:1 ratio. I can guarantee you that SWAPA will not relieve that portion of the contract. So if SWA tries to grow AT without growing SWA, they will be in violation of our CBA. Hats off to the guys who had the foresight to negotiate this several years ago.

 

[27 driver]

It is in the SWAPA contract. SWA will not be able to grow AT without growing SWA at the 3.6:1 ratio. I can guarantee you that SWAPA will not relieve that portion of the contract. So if SWA tries to grow AT without growing SWA, they will be in violation of our CBA. Hats off to the guys who had the foresight to negotiate this several years ago.

Sounds like a good clause. I guess the devil is in the details.

 

[GuppyWN]

Several years ago? WTF dude? It's in SL6 that hasn't even passed yet. It's 3.61:1 PRE transaction ratio of Tranny shiny jets vs. WN shiny jets. But let's be honest here. WN is getting all of the shiny new Tranny jets next year so that ratio will be lopsided from the git go.

Gup

 

[Ty Webb]

like somebody said, the senior guys at Airtran only care about themselves not the junior guys. So would SWA rather have 800 guys upset or 6800?

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

 

[Lear70]

What are the big difference between TA 3 and TA 4? Can you post a wavetop recap?

They're calling the current T.A. #3, but there was an unofficial T.A. 3 a month after T.A. 2 died about 3 1/2 years ago (so I jokingly refer to this one as T.A. 4). T.A. 3 (or 2.5 or whatever someone wants to call it) never made it past the NPA NC and Board, thus most pilots don't know it even existed (and technically it didn't).

There's another thread that was going about it a couple pages back now with some of the differences posted there.

 

[Cometman]

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

It must be a sore spot with you for you to get so upset. relax.

 

[carl p]

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.

 

[27 driver]

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.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Talk about a stupid post . . . . Who qualified you to comment on the different segments of our pilot group? The AirTran CA's voted down a TA that benefited them, but was bad for FO's, and as a result are getting a lesser raise now than they would have under the previous TA two years ago. The AirTran senior pilots are also the same ones who voted in 2001 to take a temporary pay cut to keep the junior pilots from being furloughed. . . . . So, no, you're wrong on all counts.

Hahaha. What a load of BS. You AT captains are the greediest lot I've ever seen.

Prove that you're not just in it for you and advocate a staple, because to all of us outsiders, that would clearly be the best SLI for the sake of the airline.