SWAPA looking to capture more Capt seats

[scoreboardII]

If SW came to the FL guys and said: "This provision in the ALPA contract with FL is preventing us from operating AirTran the way we would like to. We would like relief." It sounds like you would expect to get paid if the FL guys got compensated for giving relief?

YES, a deal is a deal.

Flipping things around, lets say SW section 6 opens up and you guys get a new contract prior to 2015 which includes signing bonuses of some kind. I doubt you would expect FL guys to get the same signing bonus even tho its a change to what your pay would be under the "deal"? I know I wouldn't.


You haven't been around SWA during a section 6, it won't even be close to finished by 2015.

We both have the right to amend our individual contracts at our own airline. If the FL contract is amended you don't have any rights to "get what we get" just as we don't have any rights to "get what you get" as long as we are separate.

Not the way SWA see's it, hence their "NO right of return" answer when asked due to "changing an agreement".[/QUOTE]

blue above...

 

[scoreboardII]

Exactly right.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, unless the gander is getting something extra, then screw the goose.

It really is disingenuous... "We want anything you get, even though you're getting nearly everything you were promised taken away."

I shake my head that it's this hard of a concept for people to grasp, and I've pretty much given up on any kind of "meeting of the minds". We're second-class citizens, be grateful for what you've been given, shut up and color.

Got it.

JAFFO

So SWA comes to SWAPA and say "hey, we need one 737 painted in AT numbers for one day after Jan 1 2015. To get that we will pay each SWAPA pilot $100,000 dollars, AT pilots get nothing". Thats fair? No.

 

[PanPan]

So you think that there can be absolutely no changes to the FL/ALPA contract from this point forward? Does that mean SWAPA and SW can't make any changes to your contract until we are one carrier?

I didn't say anything about amending the SLI conditions, simply our individual contracts with our respective airlines. Your other two responses didn't really seem to be a response to what I was saying.

 

[Lear70]

"Nearly everything you were promised taken away?"

Yep.

Dozens of pages of Agreement, basically gone with the disappearance of the 717. We're left with:

1. Placement on the SWA seniority list.
2. No furlough clause.
3. A date we are covered by the SWAPA CBA.
4. No probation.
5. SIA Grievance procedure.
6. Medical Insurance equalization.
7. Uniform allowance (which cannot be spent on the leather jacket).

That's pretty much it, in a nutshell.

The 717 and its protections was the vast bulk of the Agreement that had any benefit other than what was protected by M/B, which is continued employment, the 401(k) and profit-sharing is nearly equal money with the B-fund we had (and greatly benefits SWA to have it set up as a 401(k) instead of a B-fund), and the pay was coming when we got to SWA anyway.

Pretty much said the same thing to Mike V and Chuck M at the LAX dinner early last month. They didn't disagree, but said that they had a business to run and they made the best decision for ALL the SWA employees, us included, with the 717 deal.

Like I've said before, it's their business to run, but it does have real impact to many peoples' lives that they were counting on. Can't expect them to be happy about it.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Exactly right.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, unless the gander is getting something extra, then screw the goose.

It really is disingenuous... "We want anything you get, even though you're getting nearly everything you were promised taken away."

I shake my head that it's this hard of a concept for people to grasp, and I've pretty much given up on any kind of "meeting of the minds". We're second-class citizens, be grateful for what you've been given, shut up and color.

Got it.

JAFFO

I think you're exaggerating here somewhat (perhaps for effect?).

SWAPA's CBA with the company is separate from Airtran ALPA's CBA with the company. The fact it's the same company is the thing they have in common (along with changes to each CBA based on the SLI agreement). You keep harping that SWAPA is stopping Airtran from getting raises before Jan '15. How exactly is SWAPA doing this? We have no power to compel the company to give anyone a raise, or a reduction, for that matter. The company decides, and since your CBA has payrates in it less than SWAPA's CBA, they have no incentive to give you any more. It's in your agreement that you get the amount you get. SWAPA enforces its CBA, and Airtran ALPA enforces its CBA. To say that SWAPA influences Airtran's payrates is disingenuous at best; the company can either honor its contract with Airtran, or offer more (I assume you'd accept). It's up to them alone.

On the other hand, you may have a legitimate grievance with the company regarding the disposition of the 717s and the potential loss of pay for some pilots (or possibly the order of transition being changed out of seniority--I dunno about this for sure). If the outcome of that grievance is somehow tied to money for you, well,.. that's up to you, the company, and whatever process the grievance comes to. Not SWAPA. Blaming SWAPA just seems to be a convenient scapegoat for your complaints. Again, the only thing SWAPA can do is enforce its own contract.

As far as your other statement, "We want anything you get, even though you're getting nearly everything you were promised taken away," I beg to differ. The main thing your contract has that some people in SWAPA want is Domicile Right of Return. You have it; we don't. A lot of SWAPA pilots (namely junior ones in both seats afraid of displacement from their home domiciles) have been lobbying the union and company for it. The union seems to be at best neutral on the subject, and the company has pretty much said to blow it out your azz--it "wouldn't be fair to the Airtran pilots since they're expecting to be able to stay in whatever domicile they get." Is there anything else in your contract that you're alleging SWAPA is pimping for?

As far as "nearly everything you were promised" being taken away, again I think that's an exaggeration. You were never promised that the 717s wouldn't leave early. You were told (as was SWAPA) that the plan at the time was to keep them, hence all the parts of the agreement (and flush bid) that refer to them. However, everyone knew that the company was looking to get rid of them; your contract reflects what the company would do if they didn't get rid of them.

Plus, this latest cheese-moving primarily only negatively impacts the 717 Captains (domiciles notwithstanding), to differeing degrees depending on their seniority, and how long they would have stayed as CAs as the leases expired and they weren't senior enough to be Captains anymore. 737 guys are essentiallty unaffected, and 717 FOs probably have a slightly better deal now, if they get to move over the 737 and its higher pay sooner than under the old plan.

As far as domiciles go, everyone's expecting an ATL domicile sooner rather than later, if for no other reason, then for the sheer volume of traffic there, and the obvious need for another domicile when including the number of Airtran pilots and planes. The changes in transistion plans for planes and pilots is driven by the company and its issues (especially the slow pace of IT), and is also not "promised" to you. The only actual promise is completion by Jan '15, which would be grieveable by both sides if incomplete. Is its slow pace negatively affecting you? I don't know; if you say it is, I'll take your word for it. However, that's not SWAPA's issue--the way the company does stuff and changes its plans and implementation negatively affects us over here all the time as well.

Look Lear, I'm not saying you haven't been screwed. Both sides got screwed, and neither side is going to convince the other that theirs was worse. I will say, however, that your life/work/career change is more radical, both in plusses and minuses, than a pissed-off SWA FO's "screwjob," but no one on the Southwest side is going to believe Airtran's total 'package' was worse.

Bubba

 

[Lear70]

I think you're exaggerating here somewhat (perhaps for effect?).

Somewhat, but the point still remains.

SWAPA's CBA with the company is separate from Airtran ALPA's CBA with the company. The fact it's the same company is the thing they have in common (along with changes to each CBA based on the SLI agreement). You keep harping that SWAPA is stopping Airtran from getting raises before Jan '15. How exactly is SWAPA doing this? We have no power to compel the company to give anyone a raise, or a reduction, for that matter. The company decides, and since your CBA has payrates in it less than SWAPA's CBA, they have no incentive to give you any more. It's in your agreement that you get the amount you get. SWAPA enforces its CBA, and Airtran ALPA enforces its CBA. To say that SWAPA influences Airtran's payrates is disingenuous at best; the company can either honor its contract with Airtran, or offer more (I assume you'd accept). It's up to them alone.

That's the issue we have.

We're trying to amend the AAI CBA. We're trying to do it with higher pay rates to offset the loss of the CA seats, which affect both 717 and 737 Captains who were able to hold it, to the tune of a loss of $70k-100k a year for possibly 3-5 years total time. That's a lot of coin.

It's OUR CBA, yet every time we try to amend it with higher rates, snapping to the TFP rig to "equalize" both contracts, ANYTHING we're trying to do with our CBA that affects pay, SWAPA steps in and says "that wasn't part of the agreement and we don't think it's fair they get a raise when we're being told we need a cost-neutral contract at SWA."

That's a problem... we're being told what we can and cannot do to OUR CBA by SWAPA. That comes straight from the horse's mouth, verified by both Mike V and Chuck M last month straight to my face. When discussing different ways to offset the loss of real money to the AAI pilots in everything from 717's going away to drastically-reduced incomes from lower block hours, every idea was met with "SWAPA will get upset if we give you money they don't get."

I have a real problem with that.

On the other hand, you may have a legitimate grievance with the company regarding the disposition of the 717s and the potential loss of pay for some pilots (or possibly the order of transition being changed out of seniority--I dunno about this for sure). If the outcome of that grievance is somehow tied to money for you, well,.. that's up to you, the company, and whatever process the grievance comes to. Not SWAPA. Blaming SWAPA just seems to be a convenient scapegoat for your complaints. Again, the only thing SWAPA can do is enforce its own contract.

Grievance is what needs to happen, hasn't been filed yet, which is making some people pretty unhappy with the Association right now.

Transition out of seniority per the flush bid hasn't happened. That grievance is a slam-dunk winner and I don't think they're going to pull that trigger until they absolutely have to, as everyone they bypass would get SWA money from that point until THEY transition. That's one of the FEW bargaining chips we have, but again, when we try to talk money in exchange for it, the "SWAPA won't like it" argument comes out. When we try to get SWAPA to tell management they're OK with it, SWAPA most certainly ISN'T OK with it.

As far as your other statement, "We want anything you get, even though you're getting nearly everything you were promised taken away," I beg to differ. The main thing your contract has that some people in SWAPA want is Domicile Right of Return. You have it; we don't. A lot of SWAPA pilots (namely junior ones in both seats afraid of displacement from their home domiciles) have been lobbying the union and company for it. The union seems to be at best neutral on the subject, and the company has pretty much said to blow it out your azz--it "wouldn't be fair to the Airtran pilots since they're expecting to be able to stay in whatever domicile they get." Is there anything else in your contract that you're alleging SWAPA is pimping for?

You're arguing something that's outside the SIA. I'm talking about the SIA and what was promised to us in there and at the road shows. It's not comparing apples to apples to compare what we have in our CBA that's NOT related to the SIA and WON'T carry over to Southwest when we get there to your CBA.

Or I'll trade you, you can have BASE right of return if we have CA SEAT first right of return, even for those who can't hold it by seniority?

Plus, this latest cheese-moving primarily only negatively impacts the 717 Captains (domiciles notwithstanding), to differeing degrees depending on their seniority, and how long they would have stayed as CAs as the leases expired and they weren't senior enough to be Captains anymore. 737 guys are essentiallty unaffected, and 717 FOs probably have a slightly better deal now, if they get to move over the 737 and its higher pay sooner than under the old plan.

No, it affects the 737 CA's who bid 717 and could hold it as well. 737 pilots are affected in that the 737 transition is delayed more than planned due to the delay in the Int'l res system delay from original plans (sh*t happens), and 717 pilots are delayed more than planned because they were supposed to transition EARLIER (1st Q 2013) and faster (done by 12/31/14) than they will with the delay of the 717's to Delta.

Basically everyone got kicked 180+ days down the road for transitioning to SWA.

As far as domiciles go, everyone's expecting an ATL domicile sooner rather than later, if for no other reason, then for the sheer volume of traffic there, and the obvious need for another domicile when including the number of Airtran pilots and planes. The changes in transistion plans for planes and pilots is driven by the company and its issues (especially the slow pace of IT), and is also not "promised" to you. The only actual promise is completion by Jan '15, which would be grieveable by both sides if incomplete. Is its slow pace negatively affecting you? I don't know; if you say it is, I'll take your word for it. However, that's not SWAPA's issue--the way the company does stuff and changes its plans and implementation negatively affects us over here all the time as well.

True enough. And yes, it's affecting us. Our MCO domicile was supposed to have the first 1/3 of the 737 pilots to SWA this month, last 2/3 in Feb next year. Now it's been shoved to 1/3 in March (maybe Feb) with the last 2/3 in Sep of 2013. Doesn't affect me since I'll be deferring 'til the end but other people are affected, especially the 717 folks starting Jan next year.

The ATL domicile won't happen until 1st Q 2014 at the earliest. Can't say where I have that info, but to think it'll happen sooner is highly, highly unlikely.

Look Lear, I'm not saying you haven't been screwed. Both sides got screwed, and neither side is going to convince the other that theirs was worse. I will say, however, that your life/work/career change is more radical, both in plusses and minuses, than a pissed-off SWA FO's "screwjob," but no one on the Southwest side is going to believe Airtran's total 'package' was worse.

Bubba

Again, true enough, as long as you guys realize the inverse is true, that no one at AAI will believe SWA's total "package" was worse, either.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Somewhat, but the point still remains.


That's the issue we have.

We're trying to amend the AAI CBA. We're trying to do it with higher pay rates to offset the loss of the CA seats, which affect both 717 and 737 Captains who were able to hold it, to the tune of a loss of $70k-100k a year for possibly 3-5 years total time. That's a lot of coin.

It's OUR CBA, yet every time we try to amend it with higher rates, snapping to the TFP rig to "equalize" both contracts, ANYTHING we're trying to do with our CBA that affects pay, SWAPA steps in and says "that wasn't part of the agreement and we don't think it's fair they get a raise when we're being told we need a cost-neutral contract at SWA."

That's a problem... we're being told what we can and cannot do to OUR CBA by SWAPA. That comes straight from the horse's mouth, verified by both Mike V and Chuck M last month straight to my face. When discussing different ways to offset the loss of real money to the AAI pilots in everything from 717's going away to drastically-reduced incomes from lower block hours, every idea was met with "SWAPA will get upset if we give you money they don't get."

I have a real problem with that.

No. You're NOT being told what you can and cannot do to your CBA by SWAPA. You are most definitely not.

Lear, did it ever occur to you that Mike V and Chuck M might tell you that "SWAPA would get upset" as an excuse to not give you what you want? It's easier to say no when you can shift the blame on someone else. One bargaining union has no ability to control another's contract. SWAPA's thoughts on how much money you make has no more bearing on what you actually get, than its thoughts on how much F/As or Dispatchers get, for that matter. If the company wanted to give you more money, they could and they would. Believe it. The excuse you related above is just that--an excuse. And you're buying it, because I think you want to buy it--that SWAPA's the bad guy. Management has absolutely no problem doing things that "upset" SWAPA--hell, they do it all of the time--especially if it comes from the mouth of Mike V and/or Chuck M.

Speaking of which, if you haven't figured it out by now, Chuck M doesn't really have a lot of credibility with the average line pilot at Southwest. Ask anyone. Ask about: UFlyMike fiasco and coverup, and how much money and goodwill that cost the company. TA-1 fiasco and the resultant punitive downgrades, and how much that cost the company in Captain premium pay. Contradictory Chuck memos two days apart regarding KCM and why the company didn't want to play, but then it does. Firing of Kent Roper as MCO chief, and the "forced" retirement of Bob Torti in Training. Etc., etc.

As far as Mike V goes, he's a numbers guy, and seems to believe that pilots are a bunch of overpaid whiners. I'm sure he thinks the same about you guys as well, if that makes you feel any better. I'm sure he's laughing his azz off, telling you that you can't have pay parity, and then being able to get you to blame the other overpaid, whining pilot group for your payscale. Win-win for him.

If you're gonna' get some sort of pay adjustment to account for the 717 sublease and the resultant changes, it's going to be through a grievance. You may as well file it now. SWAPA is not your enemy.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Somewhat, but the point still remains.



You're arguing something that's outside the SIA. I'm talking about the SIA and what was promised to us in there and at the road shows. It's not comparing apples to apples to compare what we have in our CBA that's NOT related to the SIA and WON'T carry over to Southwest when we get there to your CBA.

Or I'll trade you, you can have BASE right of return if we have CA SEAT first right of return, even for those who can't hold it by seniority?

No, I was arguing what you said in your post--that we wanted what YOU had, and didn't want you to have what we had. To the best of my knowledge, the only thing in your CBA that anyone at SWAPA covets is Domicile ROR, and that's a non-starter with the company.

As far as your trade offer goes, I'm pretty sure that even the most pissed-off, displaced junior guys in each seat who have to commute now would probably not think that a prudent trade. Sorry.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Somewhat, but the point still remains.


True enough. And yes, it's affecting us. Our MCO domicile was supposed to have the first 1/3 of the 737 pilots to SWA this month, last 2/3 in Feb next year. Now it's been shoved to 1/3 in March (maybe Feb) with the last 2/3 in Sep of 2013. Doesn't affect me since I'll be deferring 'til the end but other people are affected, especially the 717 folks starting Jan next year.

The ATL domicile won't happen until 1st Q 2014 at the earliest. Can't say where I have that info, but to think it'll happen sooner is highly, highly unlikely.

See what I mean? The company does stuff like this to us all the time. Moving the cheese, as they say. Changing plans that negatively affect us because they need to or it helps their bottom line. Like I said, Flight Ops has no problem "upsetting" SWAPA when they feel they need to. The only way to get something (money, etc.) for sure, is to get it guaranteed in your CBA. The transition schedule is NOT guaranteed, only the completion date was.

Again, true enough, as long as you guys realize the inverse is true, that no one at AAI will believe SWA's total "package" was worse, either.

I have no doubt whatsoever that this is true, and if I ever thought otherwise, I've been thoroughly convinced by Fletch, SWA717 and others.

Bubba

 

[redflyer65]

No. You're NOT being told what you can and cannot do to your CBA by SWAPA. You are most definitely not.

Lear, did it ever occur to you that Mike V and Chuck M might tell you that "SWAPA would get upset" as an excuse to not give you what you want? It's easier to say no when you can shift the blame on someone else. One bargaining union has no ability to control another's contract. SWAPA's thoughts on how much money you make has no more bearing on what you actually get, than its thoughts on how much F/As or Dispatchers get, for that matter. If the company wanted to give you more money, they could and they would. Believe it. The excuse you related above is just that--an excuse. And you're buying it, because I think you want to buy it--that SWAPA's the bad guy. Management has absolutely no problem doing things that "upset" SWAPA--hell, they do it all of the time--especially if it comes from the mouth of Mike V and/or Chuck M.

Speaking of which, if you haven't figured it out by now, Chuck M doesn't really have a lot of credibility with the average line pilot at Southwest. Ask anyone. Ask about: UFlyMike fiasco and coverup, and how much money and goodwill that cost the company. TA-1 fiasco and the resultant punitive downgrades, and how much that cost the company in Captain premium pay. Contradictory Chuck memos two days apart regarding KCM and why the company didn't want to play, but then it does. Firing of Kent Roper as MCO chief, and the "forced" retirement of Bob Torti in Training. Etc., etc.

As far as Mike V goes, he's a numbers guy, and seems to believe that pilots are a bunch of overpaid whiners. I'm sure he thinks the same about you guys as well, if that makes you feel any better. I'm sure he's laughing his azz off, telling you that you can't have pay parity, and then being able to get you to blame the other overpaid, whining pilot group for your payscale. Win-win for him.

If you're gonna' get some sort of pay adjustment to account for the 717 sublease and the resultant changes, it's going to be through a grievance. You may as well file it now. SWAPA is not your enemy.

Bubba

Lear,

Bubba has alot of this nailed.

It's the same on this side with ROR. The company easily says we won't do it because of the Airtran guys. I don't believe it for a minute. I doubt they even asked, its just a convenient excuse. Just like your getting.

If Gary and MVDV wanted to pay you full SW pay right now, they could. SWAPA isn't going to stop them from running their company. That's not even plausible and I've never seen SWAPA have that kind of power at the GO to be honest with you.

They don't want to pay you that because they are saving money. That's it. They won't voluntarily pay you SW pay. NO WAY. I'm not saying I agree with them, just trying to explain the way they work. Just like Agreement One. You jack with them, they don't show you the hammer....they swing it (you just have to know they have it behind their back).

Saying SWAPA is stopping anything going on at Airtran is bordering on Black Helicopter thinking. I don't buy it.

RF

 

[Lear70]

Then you wouldn't mind if we asked Steve Chase to come with us to our next negotiating session and saying SWAPA pilots won't mind if we get compensation equal to the cost of what we are losing monthly in pay since the draw-down plus what the Captains will lose unt they upgrade again?

Pretty sure this has been done and we were told no thanks by SWAPA.

 

[Lear70]

Double post.

 

[Lear70]

Then you wouldn't mind if we asked Steve Chase to come with us to our next negotiating session and saying SWAPA pilots won't mind if we get compensation equal to the cost of what we are losing monthly in pay since the draw-down plus what the Captains will lose unt they upgrade again? Without SWAPA getting anything more since they are already getting more CA seats from the 717 deal?

Pretty sure this has been done and we were told no thanks by SWAPA.

 

[scoreboardII]

Because maybe we asked for the AT side to go to SWA and state Right of return was no big deal, because AT already has RoR. Nope, didn't happen. Karma is a bitch.

 

[redflyer65]

Then you wouldn't mind if we asked Steve Chase to come with us to our next negotiating session and saying SWAPA pilots won't mind if we get compensation equal to the cost of what we are losing monthly in pay since the draw-down plus what the Captains will lose unt they upgrade again?

Pretty sure this has been done and we were told no thanks by SWAPA.

So hypothetically, if Steve did go, and did 'approve it' from the SWAPA veiwpoint....you honestly think they would? Really?

I have to disagree.

 

[Lear70]

Maybe, maybe not.

But it would go a long way towards easing some feelings around here if we felt we had ANY support from SWAPA.

 

[FlyinGuy]

I am not sure why you need to feel any support from SWAPA. The deal is what it is. If SWA has moved your cheese, then you (ALPA) go to SWA and negotiate. Of course GK, VdV, and Chuck will all blame it on SWAPA. They are not going to fork over one red cent to your group because it is about cash out the door not about negotiating with SWAPA.

I know things are not going well for some of you. Blaming SWAPA or the pilots is like (insert really good analogy). Anyway, they are not going to negotiate a new contract with us anytime soon and I would be surprised if they give you any cash. Best of luck and hopefully things will start to move in a positive direction for everyone.

 

[Lear70]

I am not sure why you need to feel any support from SWAPA. The deal is what it is. If SWA has moved your cheese, then you (ALPA) go to SWA and negotiate. Of course GK, VdV, and Chuck will all blame it on SWAPA. They are not going to fork over one red cent to your group because it is about cash out the door not about negotiating with SWAPA.

I know things are not going well for some of you. Blaming SWAPA or the pilots is like (insert really good analogy). Anyway, they are not going to negotiate a new contract with us anytime soon and I would be surprised if they give you any cash. Best of luck and hopefully things will start to move in a positive direction for everyone.

Oh I'm not angry with the pilots. I recognize you wanted the best you could get, we all did, and I recognize that most of you could care less if they threw us a bone one way or another and might say "Well, we DID get a lot more CA seats than we were counting on, so good for you for getting SOMETHING for that curveball".

My beef is with SWAPA not stepping up to help. When SWA says "SWAPA would want something", it would be nice to walk in with SWAPA reps and for them to say "No, if you can give them something that doesn't hurt us (money) in compensation for the CA seats they're losing that we're gaining, we won't object."

Otherwise there's no way to counter SWA management's claim. If SWAPA would do that, I'd stop saying that they don't want us to have pay parity right now. But they won't, which leads me to one, inevitable conclusion.

Wouldn't take much to clear this one up IF, and I mean if SWAPA doesn't care if they throw us a bone...

 

[scoreboardII]

Sorry Lear, SWAPA has a duty to NOT step up and help the AT side, anything they do to help sets them up for failure to defend the SWAPA pilots. Put another way, one more penny to your side, in the end, takes a penny away from our side, sorry if you don't see the business aspect of this deal.

 

[jonjuan]

Turning into usair v. america west.

 

[scoreboardII]

Absolutely not, when it's all over, one team, that team is still two mutually opposed entities and split, and not our fault.

 

[Lear70]

Sorry Lear, SWAPA has a duty to NOT step up and help the AT side, anything they do to help sets them up for failure to defend the SWAPA pilots. Put another way, one more penny to your side, in the end, takes a penny away from our side, sorry if you don't see the business aspect of this deal.

Oh I *DO* see it that way, but that brings us back to my original point, which Bubba was debating:

SWAPA *IS* working against us to achieve pay parity, albeit passively, for the exact reason you stated above, and is also why SWAPA is in NO hurry to take over representation.

No use gnashing teeth about it, just didn't want there to be any mistake about what exactly is going on with the situation. We're dead in the water because:

1. If we sue to negate the SIA due to the basis of it being rendered null and void (717 protections in exchange for seniority) and win (50/50), we no longer have a no-furlough policy and we're so grossly overstaffed we'd likely have WARN notices out the door for 1/3 of the remaining pilots faster than you can say "reciprocity". (this is why people convinced Schroll to abandon his lawsuit - 99% certain that this is where he was going with it, we discussed it before he left). They'd stop all transitions until the issue was worked out, which could be years if it becomes UAir/AWA.

2. The grievance sucks because you have no way to PROVE the EXACT extent of monetary damages for the loss of the 717's because you can't predict future upgrade / growth to know how long it will take our CA's to get back in the seat and no arbitrator is going to play "I have a crystal ball".

3. There's no other mechanism to force them to come to the table. We've already withdrawn our relief from West Coast overnights (35k a month cost to the company to make all the West Coast stuff 20+ hr overnights - lines are so bad it wouldn't help us if they had the relief anyway) and we are refusing to give them relief from the training concerns stemming from having the flush bid holding up the way they want to transition pilots, but a $35 Million dollar price tag (training and other relief they need) is cheaper than a $120 Million dollar price tag (pay parity).

4. We've got nothing else to bargain with.

So, without the support of SWAPA to stop fighting us to gain pay parity now (or even snap-up to TFP calculated pay or snap-up to 2014 pay rates in our CBA which has been proposed and rejected), and the unavailability of any other avenue to fight, we're pretty much screwed.

That's the message the Association can't put out there. We go 'round and 'round but, at the end of the day, neither SWA nor SWAPA WANTS us to have anything more than we already do, so what we have now is what we have.

Can't do anything about it, but don't want people under any illusion that there's something positive "just around the corner".

 

[humveedriver]

Oh I *DO* see it that way, but that brings us back to my original point, which Bubba was debating:

SWAPA *IS* working against us to achieve pay parity, albeit passively, for the exact reason you stated above, and is also why SWAPA is in NO hurry to take over representation.

No use gnashing teeth about it, just didn't want there to be any mistake about what exactly is going on with the situation. We're dead in the water because:

1. If we sue to negate the SIA due to the basis of it being rendered null and void (717 protections in exchange for seniority) and win (50/50), we no longer have a no-furlough policy and we're so grossly overstaffed we'd likely have WARN notices out the door for 1/3 of the remaining pilots faster than you can say "reciprocity". (this is why people convinced Schroll to abandon his lawsuit - 99% certain that this is where he was going with it, we discussed it before he left). They'd stop all transitions until the issue was worked out, which could be years if it becomes UAir/AWA.

2. The grievance sucks because you have no way to PROVE the EXACT extent of monetary damages for the loss of the 717's because you can't predict future upgrade / growth to know how long it will take our CA's to get back in the seat and no arbitrator is going to play "I have a crystal ball".

3. There's no other mechanism to force them to come to the table. We've already withdrawn our relief from West Coast overnights (35k a month cost to the company to make all the West Coast stuff 20+ hr overnights - lines are so bad it wouldn't help us if they had the relief anyway) and we are refusing to give them relief from the training concerns stemming from having the flush bid holding up the way they want to transition pilots, but a $35 Million dollar price tag (training and other relief they need) is cheaper than a $120 Million dollar price tag (pay parity).

4. We've got nothing else to bargain with.

So, without the support of SWAPA to stop fighting us to gain pay parity now (or even snap-up to TFP calculated pay or snap-up to 2014 pay rates in our CBA which has been proposed and rejected), and the unavailability of any other avenue to fight, we're pretty much screwed.

That's the message the Association can't put out there. We go 'round and 'round but, at the end of the day, neither SWA nor SWAPA WANTS us to have anything more than we already do, so what we have now is what we have.

Can't do anything about it, but don't want people under any illusion that there's something positive "just around the corner".

To put it another way. It's cool some of you SWA pilots got to work for the Southwest Airlines that was an incredible airline AND an incredible place to work. Unfortunately that is an airline of the past.

 

[madjack]

U can't have sl9 back...

 

[Luv2BFlyin]

I'm good with option 1 and 2.

 

[waveflyer]

The quicker we are all one group the better- disappointed, as I've always been, that we're dragging out separate ops this long- appears shady-

This swa guy is not particularly stoked about AT pilots being paid less while the company drags this out twice as long as it ought to take

 

[waveflyer]

To put it another way. It's cool some of you SWA pilots got to work for the Southwest Airlines that was an incredible airline AND an incredible place to work. Unfortunately that is an airline of the past.

That gets you the same response I give the swa pilots- who else is better? And what are YOU doing, besides posting negative crap on FI, to make this place better?

It'll be what we make it- GK is the most influential- but we have a big role in what culture we have here - remember that

 

[humveedriver]

That gets you the same response I give the swa pilots- who else is better? And what are YOU doing, besides posting negative crap on FI, to make this place better?

It'll be what we make it- GK is the most influential- but we have a big role in what culture we have here - remember that

Wave, my flights are awesome. I'm the Captain. I set the the tone. I don't do drama, slam click or get wrapped up in the small stuff. I can bring that attitude to any airline or even job. So as long as the captains that I fly with have a similar approach not much should change. That's the world I live in. The decisions that SWA makes is something out of my control. You can't deny that SWA has changed its business model and is looking for concessions. I classify that as negative and not crap.

 

[737tanker]

SWAPA *IS* working against us to achieve pay parity, albeit passively, for the exact reason you stated above, and is also why SWAPA is in NO hurry to take over representation.

What AirTran needs to do is force the issue. Go to the NMB and have them declare that SWAPA is a union for both AirTran and SWA. SWAPA will drag their feet because it is easier for them. So force the issue and make it happen.

 

[ASADFW7]

SWAPA helping AAI pilots would be a DFR case and potentionally end the association.