SWAPA Info packet FEDEXed to all AirTran Pilots

[redflyer65]

Lear,

Just trying to clarify, we trust Gary will do the right thing with this SLI.

He has continually stated he needs 15% ROI before he will grow the airline. Those are his words, not mine. I have to say though, he really has stuck to what he says...whether I like it or not.

There has been areas where Southwest could have grown, but Gary has really stuck to the 15% number. That number in the airline business is pretty high..but in the end, he's at the helm.

Just trying to show where we've been over the past few years.

 

[Flycatcher99]

Both good points, MadJack. I don't have an answer for all of it, as I don't know all the moving pieces. That's why we both have Merger/Negotiating committees. I only know what they've released and what's been publicly stated by GK, MV, BJ, and others.

To add, we here at SWA trust GK. It's just that sometimes announcements are made with a fair amount of optimism (which is what one would expect a leader to do), that perhaps later will not come true, often due to changes in circumstances (oil prices, economy, etc). Plus, there is much speculation here as to whether SWA will continue to serve many AAI cities, ones that simply never would have been considered outside of this acquisition, and ones that may still not hold up to the post-merger business plan. It's entirely likely that these decisions have yet to be made, and thus would be a change in plans that would negate possible growth.

(disclaimer: most of your pilots are great people in person, although I've met some not-so-friendly ones since this started. Fear makes otherwise decent people do ugly things, fact of life on BOTH sides of the table).

Very true. Looking forward to working with you all, and going up against the other majors with you all along.

Shootr, that's a good point, but then, to play Devil's advocate, might GK's view of "not harming Southwest pilots" also be different in his eyes versus yours? (I don't mean that aggressively or meanly, I'm just playing devil's advocate with the whole "trusting GK implicitly" thing that seems to come out every so often).

This is true. We honestly do not know the position that GK and the rest of the SWA management will take with this, which is why you see much angst on our side of this situation. The suggestions that GK might not merge operations are not threats, but honest speculation at the extent to which SWA mgmt honors their promise to preserve our interests, if the AAI MC makes demands that would potentially harm SWA pilots' career value.

 

[shootr]

Shootr, that's a good point, but then, to play Devil's advocate, might GK's view of "not harming Southwest pilots" also be different in his eyes versus yours? (I don't mean that aggressively or meanly, I'm just playing devil's advocate with the whole "trusting GK implicitly" thing that seems to come out every so often).

Lear,

I don't claim to KNOW what's in GK's mind or exactly what he'll do about what. I will say that based upon experience, GK's decisions over what to do about our SLI have less to do with "not harming Southwest pilots" and more to do with avoiding a Cactus type fiasco because of the effect on the bottom line. "Harm" is in the eye of the beholder and the only people who will know what "harm" to a Southwest pilot is and what SWAPA will do about it...will be Southwest pilots.

We may better understand GK's plan, soon. Using Cactus as an example of what he doesn't want to happen would be a useful explanation to the shareholders about any decisions he makes.

shootr

 

[Lear70]

Fair enough points, gents. It will be a while before we know how all this goes, but it's good to have open, respectful discussion, and I appreciate you sharing what you guys are thinking.

Enjoy your week, heading out on vacay tomorrow.

 

[PCL_128]

Boy you guys sure are spinning this well...I am a 10 year SWA FO and if all your CPs keep thier seats and obviously are senior to me......

Lear is correct. Just because our captains don't lose their seats doesn't necessarily mean they're senior to you. They may be, or they may not be. SLI agreements and arbitrated awards always contain "no bump/no flush" provisions, which mean that regardless of what your seniority is, you can't be bumped out of your seat, equipment, or domicile. That means that an AirTran captain could be 20% junior to you on a combined list, but he doesn't lose his seat. But, when you upgrade into a captain vacancy, even though he's been a captain for all of that time, you'll be ahead of him on the captain list.

 

[GhettoBeechjet]

So you trust your CEO or you don't. Which is it?

If he says on one hand that he will protect your pilots from suffering a loss as a result of this acquisition AND he ALSO says that Southwest will be entering a growth mode from this acquisition, how can you believe him on one count and disbelieve him on another?

Not understanding the double-talk coming from some of you about your CEO...

Lear the answer is yes and no. Let me explain
Do I trust my CEO to take care of his employees? Yes absolutely because on a very personal level he has demonstrated it to me. In 2009 and early 2010 when things were in the toilet several anaylists were publically calling on him to cut staff and downgraded our stock when he didn't. He ignored them. Any cut he made would have most certainly included me. In the long run by any measure he was correct because by mid 2010 we needed people and it would not have been cost effective to furlough but no one knew that at the time. But the fact remains he kept all of us when it would have been easier not to. SO on that count I trust him.

On Gary's growth predictions no not so much. We live in a very changable world and he has given himself the tools to change with it. Just because he says he plans growth for 2013 now and means it doesn't mean it will happen. If we get to 2013 and things have changed he has no problem changing course. The bar he requires for growth is very high.

 

[madjack]

PCL said: SLI agreements and arbitrated awards always contain "no bump/no flush" provisions, which mean that regardless of what your seniority is, you can't be bumped out of your seat, equipment, or domicile. That means that an AirTran captain could be 20% junior to you on a combined list, but he doesn't lose his seat.

Well this is not your typical acqusition...there is one side that stands to gain much more significantly than the other. The scenario you describe needs to also compensate the SWA pilot as well as the seat protected AAI CP...Arbitrators are neutral and will find a solution for this that is fair and equitable for the SWA pilots also...

 

[Bill Nelson]

SLI agreements and arbitrated awards always contain "no bump/no flush"

Not ALL of them.

 

[PCL_128]

Not ALL of them.

Except for Shuttle America (which was going out of business), I'm not aware of any other arbitration decisions that didn't include it.

 

[scoreboardII]

Lear is correct. Just because our captains don't lose their seats doesn't necessarily mean they're senior to you. They may be, or they may not be. SLI agreements and arbitrated awards always contain "no bump/no flush" provisions, which mean that regardless of what your seniority is, you can't be bumped out of your seat, equipment, or domicile. That means that an AirTran captain could be 20% junior to you on a combined list, but he doesn't lose his seat. But, when you upgrade into a captain vacancy, even though he's been a captain for all of that time, you'll be ahead of him on the captain list.

Once again PCL, you can't have it both ways, our contract and our seats.

Your hiding behind the "you won't be harmed" mantra when in fact harm is done by lost pay until upgrade.

So, are YOU willing to fund pay protection for SWA FO's delayed in upgrade because an AT captain is holding that seat? If not, you alluded then that SWA is therefore responsible. OK, if it is then OK to pay protect a SWA FO, it sure as heck is OK to pay protect an AI captain soon to be SWA FO. And probably cheaper.

How's that Skywest ASA deal working out?