SWAPA might like SWA proposal

[Luv2BFlyin]

I understand. It doesn't work in your favor, so you'd rather disengage. That's cool. Take care.

I was merely pointing out that a general statement of 70% pay raises is not factually correct. I just checked APC and it appears that there is a roughly 20-25% difference.

 

[jonjuan]

There is a very large gap between 40% and "not lose any seniority". Wouldn't you say Red ?

He's an all or nothing kinda guy. It helps get his point across. (assuming he)

 

[Slug]

According to some reports, senior FO's at aai would lose close to 32 % under the latest proposal that didn't make it out for a vote....

Virtually impossible for this to happen; it could only happen if your longevity was changed to 0. A 30% (conservative number) pay increase, yes. If you are talking career expectations I could see a little less than +30%, but not much. I've seen computer models that show the lowest gains are in the 20% range for the entire range of seniority.

 

[PCL_128]

Well from the verbage I wasn't sure if the proposal was REJECTED or hadn't been acted on yet or hadn't even been presented to the MEC. Why are they even bothering to negoitiate? Is there anything really left to discuss? I don't think so. IMHO mediation is a waste of time as well.

Under our structure, nothing gets voted on by the MEC until the committee has reached a deal. The MEC went out to Dallas yesterday to hear what SWA management had to say. But, the MC has not reached a deal, so there was nothing for our MEC to decide on. If a deal is reached, then the MEC will vote on whether to send it out to the pilots. That hasn't happened. So, nothing has been either rejected or endorsed.

 

[dicko]

This is Not really the place to discuss this. Ask pcl and your other reps to give you the option to vote on your future. If you agree on whatever is presented, vote yes. If not, vote no.

Its my opinion each pilot group should have a chance to decide on their futures. It should be an educated vote based on all of the facts, not simply the few talking points which have been presented thus far.

If you really think arbitration is where you want to go, vote for it. Quite possibly your mc and MEC might decide that for you. It's legal and you did elect them as your duly elected reps.

Some, if not most of this, at this juncture is pointless.

PCL isn't a rep. We fired him. Although the spin above is worthy of him. You learned much as an ALPA Rep.

I would congratulate you guys though. You've actually found a proposal that would get voted down. Not an easy task here

Happy Friday all. It's time for my medicine.

Cheers

 

[Empennage]

PCL isn't a rep. We fired him. Although the spin above is worthy of him. You learned much as an ALPA Rep.

I would congratulate you guys though. You've actually found a proposal that would get voted down. Not an easy task here

Happy Friday all. It's time for my medicine.

Cheers

You have some information incorrect.

 

[Luv2BFlyin]

You have some information incorrect.

Please correct him then. It all looks accurate, I had to check the calendar to make sure it was indeed Friday, that was my only question.

 

[runfast]

The 32% was the number of percentage that would be lost by some of the more senior aai FOs if they were to be stapled to the swa FOs, which I believe to be part of gk proposal...

 

[jball2]

I remember somewhere, the AAI guys touting that Gary thinks we are worth this or that because he bought us and so on. Gary has stated what he thinks your worth. It's up to you to agree with him or not. The number is on the table!

 

[Empennage]

Please correct him then. It all looks accurate, I had to check the calendar to make sure it was indeed Friday, that was my only question.

I'll leave that up to you.

As far as the other information where aresomee of you guys getting it. It is not public. I have not seen it anywhere else exept for you 3 posters.

 

[MINIME]

Like one or several of your LUV brothers have stated, you guys really need to understand what is acceptable to you. I don't think I'm wrong in saying that a staple in any sort of fashion will not fly. Not with Airtran, not with any group, I don't think. The Frontier guys turned down a staple. Even as their company was in dire financial stress. How in the world do you expect a group from an airline that was in solid financial footing to take anything resembling a staple? It is not reasonable, and quite frankly highly impossible. I don't care how much you brag about your pay, and this and that. Even the humiliation tactics won't work.

I fail to see where the combined Airtran group is crying arbitration or nothing. They have stated that if a fair deal is not reached, that they are ready to take their chances in arbitration. What choice do they have? To take what you are offering even if they consider it unacceptable? Again, unacceptable might be some sort of a staple, for the record. That is the process that you guys agreed to. It's just a logical step in the order of things. You may not like it, they may not like it, but that is the process. Besides, if you are so sure of the "ultimate" outcome, why do you appear so afraid of it?

You have stated that if you don't like the results, the whole thing could be nuked. Well, with that in mind, if I was a LUV guy, I'd be pushing for arbitration til kingdom come, and eventually get my dream scenario. After all, you guys don't appear to think that you need Airtran and the synergies that might be realized with a combined group, right? Don't worry, DAL agrees with you. Heck, Anderson will even cheer you on!

While Southwest has always managed to outperform and defy nay sayers, I think this time you could end up on the wrong side of History. In your nuke scenario, you would be putting gainfully employed families on the street. Those pilots, gate agents, res. agents, etc. etc., have families as well. Families that by all accounts were somewhat comfortable in their situations before your arrival. I'm not implying that LUV pilots had anything to do with the purchase of that carrier. Some of you, however, are very clear in your desires if you don't get your way. Wether it's serious or implied, possible or impossible, I don't think it's cool at all. I know, you could careless what I think, fine.

Ask anybody that was at TWA and see how they felt when the rug was pulled from under them. At least in the TWA case, 911 had a lot to do with it. Here it would be like junior not getting his way and telling daddy to kill it. Totally different circumstances. If that makes you sleep well at night, then by all means. Rest assured, however, that most in the pilot world no matter how intense the competition between our carriers, would never wish that upon you. Regardless of how much I may, or, may not disagree with you.

 

[NuGuy]

Heyas,

The above post is correct. Mediation is a waste of time, especially when the mediator is one of the arbitration panel.

No negotiating team in their right mind will say anything that even slightly damages their position in this circumstance.

The only way around it is if there was a "no prejudice" clause in the process agreement, where statements during mediation could not be used in the subsequent arbitration.

Nu

 

[redflyer65]

The AirTran MEC did not endorse the proposal. The Merger Committees are back at the bargaining table today.

This post was the most lame of the week. The SWAPA BOD hasn't endorsed it either, but it doesn't mean it's dead.

 

[frqntflyr]

I fail to see where the combined Airtran group is crying arbitration or nothing. They have stated that if a fair deal is not reached, that they are ready to take their chances in arbitration. What choice do they have? To take what you are offering even if they consider it unacceptable? Again, unacceptable might be some sort of a staple, for the record. That is the process that you guys agreed to. It's just a logical step in the order of things. You may not like it, they may not like it, but that is the process. Besides, if you are so sure of the "ultimate" outcome, why do you appear so afraid of it?

You have stated that if you don't like the results, the whole thing could be nuked. Well, with that in mind, if I was a LUV guy, I'd be pushing for arbitration til kingdom come, and eventually get my dream scenario. After all, you guys don't appear to think that you need Airtran and the synergies that might be realized with a combined group, right? Don't worry, DAL agrees with you. Heck, Anderson will even cheer you on!

This is probably the 100th time I've read this kind of reasoning and I've chosen to ignore it until now. I'm going to first address the obvious difference, generally speaking, in our collective mentality and AAI's. A point like yours is made when all that matters is YOU. There is no ownership of the future. No regard for culture, company performance or competitiveness. It is myopic, self-gratifying, and quite dangerous.

That said, I do NOT fear arbitration, and I assure you most SWA pilots do NOT fear arbitration. We do, however, realize that it will delay the consummation of our synergies, increase the risk that the buyout fails due to unrest on both sides, and lead to overall uncertainty for us (AAI and SWA pilots), mgmt, and our shareholders. I have a long career here and care deeply about preserving the workplace environment I get to enjoy.

Please stop assuming that because we do not want to go to arbitration, we fear it. Frankly, if this offer from SWA is fair and equitable (I'm sure it is), it will be present in the hands of the "deciders" in arbitration. Those from other airlines, like Delta, would love nothing more than see us go down an ugly path. A lean, cohesive SWA is a lot to handle....now there is some well placed fear.

 

[easydoesit]

Do you feel like a staple of all of AT's FO's is fair and equitable? That is what was on the table last night.

 

[frqntflyr]

There are way too many variables to consider. If you were given $5 million and a straight staple would you take it? I would...heck I would resign for that much cash. How about $1? Now that is just one variable. Seniority, as much as you want it to be, is NOT everything. If it was, I would have never left my old airline at top 10% seniority in the left seat now would I? Anyway, neither you nor I know enough about the proposal to debate its merit. Moot point.

 

[redflyer65]

It's all about career earnings and eventually QOL. Stability to some degree as well. Those are the only reasons we leave other places to start over again. The differences between starting at the bottom of AAI vs SW are substantial.

 

[Sy-bill]

Geeze people. Calm down. Obviously Mr. Kelly has indicated what he would want in this SLI and now both sides are getting down to business to hammer out the details. This will take time but I am rather certain that arbitration is not the objective.

Give this time and the majorities will be happy. This was just another good business move by a well managed company.

This should be good news to all. What we likely didn't know is negotiations were a bit off track and the company leader came in to stabilize the situation.

 

[PCL_128]

It's all about career earnings

Career earnings are impossible to predict from mainline carrier to mainline carrier. Yes, it's easy to say that working at any mainline carrier will earn you more over the course of a career than a career at a regional, but it's impossible to say that a career at SWA is any more valuable in the long term than a career at any other mainline carrier. Just 10 years ago, a career at Delta was more valuable than a career at SWA by a country mile. Now? Not so much. It can change in the blink of an eye. In another 10 years, a career at USAirways may look like a better bet than a career at SWA. Anything can happen, no matter how much you guys want to pretend that your'e indestructible.

 

[madjack]

Dicko,

I would congratulate you guys though. You've actually found a proposal that would get voted down. Not an easy task here

SWAPA did not develop the proposal. Southwest Airlines Inc, that is the sole owner of a certain holding company, developed this proposal...