• NC Software is having a Black Friday Sale Event thru December 4th on Logbook Pro, APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook, Cirrus Elite Binders, and more. Use coupon code BF2020 at checkout to redeem 15% off your purchase. Click here to shop now.
  • NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

SWAPA Reps speak out against TA.

HowardBorden

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Posts
889
Total Time
14000+
The BoD has placed this mess in the memberships hands to stand up and give a collective HELL NO! Whether you agree that was the best course of action is irrelevant at this point. It is our time to take a stand and collectively make our voices heard loud and clear. Lets do what we need to do to get back to the negotiating table with some leverage. Management believes we side with them on this, I am not buying that view. Vote no on this TA and spread the word to those that think this is good enough. It is not, not even close.

From the MDW reps:
Your NC came to a point in the negotiation where they felt that they had achieved the maximum amount of gain with the leverage they currently have. My vote to send this TA to you is not an endorsement of it. All of our consultants and subject matter experts agree that we will have gained far more leverage for the possibility of further contractual gains in the case of a full membership "no" vote. It is time for management to hear your voice.

From the MCO reps:
If we vote "no," we are guaranteed but one thing, our current Collective Bargaining Agreement (contract) remains as is. Is that so bad? Frankly, given the relief in scope, elimination of the lance program, subsets that may reduce our flexibility, I prefer we keep our current contract. I believe our leverage on scope alone is getting stronger by the day. So what is scope relief worth?

From the BWI reps:
This vote was, in fact, only a vote to allow you to see the AIP and strategically place us in the best position for future movement at the table. Your BWI reps are NOT in favor of this AIP for a variety of reasons. Our goals, as clearly dictated by you, were reserve, retirement, and compensation. Your board was placed in a difficult position and needed to act to place our membership in the best strategic position possible under the circumstances. It will be through a resounding rejection of this TA by you, that we will gain the leverage needed to move the Company beyond what is a substandard contract in several areas. Understand we are recommending you VOTE NO and show Gary Kelly exactly how you feel about his offer. He thinks your BOD is out of touch and he thinks you will actually pass this substandard contract. It is time for you all to show him he is wrong.

From the OAK reps:
A majority "no" vote will give us that leverage. The larger the "no" vote, the more leverage we will have. So we bought and paid for Section 1, and we are going to sell it back for a 4 percent raise since 2011 and a .7 percent increase in 401(k) match?
 

Tripower455

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Posts
1,357
Total Time
Lots..
Exactly what is needed to get the fence sitters on board, or at least to read past the huge "raises".
 

HowardBorden

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Posts
889
Total Time
14000+
And the PHX Reps say "Vote yes, Gary gave us a raise."
That is their prerogative, however I respectfully disagree. There are many reps which are diametrically opposed to that viewpoint. As a member, it is up to the individual to decide what best represents your wants and needs. One man one vote, use it wisely!
 

Ty Webb

Hostage to Fortune
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Posts
6,525
Total Time
11000+
That is their prerogative, however I respectfully disagree. There are many reps which are diametrically opposed to that viewpoint. As a member, it is up to the individual to decide what best represents your wants and needs. One man one vote, use it wisely!


Well said, except this TA is a turd by nearly any measure, other than just a small increase in the pay per trip tables, and those meager gains will be eaten up elsewhere.

Honestly, I would find it hard to understand the thought process of anyone who would willingly vote for this.
 

Saluki Dawg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Posts
395
Total Time
10000
So the OAK Reps think Scope is for sale? I guess they just haven't gotten to a price they're willing to sell it back for. I fear that this attitude not only permeates the BOD, but the majority of our pilots as well. Scope can NEVER EVER be for sale no matter how much the Company "sweetens the pot". Codeshare, Airline Partnerships, or Interlining = A NO VOTE!
 

HowardBorden

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Posts
889
Total Time
14000+
Scope can NEVER EVER be for sale no matter how much the Company "sweetens the pot". Codeshare, Airline Partnerships, or Interlining = A NO VOTE!
I think most likely you are preaching to the choir regarding those that frequent this board or any other for that matter, please preach those words to anyone that will listen while on the line.
 

fletch717

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
589
Total Time
where
The only problem is Swapa has zero leverage, and the company knows it. This pilot group doesn't have the resolve to do what it takes to get a contract. And now, in mediation (a huge mistake) our hands are tied. If this proposal is turned down you won't see a contract for a Long time. SWA mgmt can look a the mediator and say "we're trying, but the pilots are being stubborn." Meanwhile pilots continue to pick up every scrap of open time there is. If nothing else you guys are an entertaining bunch of morons.
 

HowardBorden

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Posts
889
Total Time
14000+
The only problem is Swapa has zero leverage, and the company knows it. This pilot group doesn't have the resolve to do what it takes to get a contract. And now, in mediation (a huge mistake) our hands are tied. If this proposal is turned down you won't see a contract for a Long time. SWA mgmt can look a the mediator and say "we're trying, but the pilots are being stubborn." Meanwhile pilots continue to pick up every scrap of open time there is. If nothing else you guys are an entertaining bunch of morons.
Untrue. The leverage comes from the majority of the pilot group being content with status quo as opposed to mutilating section 1. The company is obviously salivating at another acquisition and wants some relief in those areas before they write the check. Saying no is much easier when you know how much saying yes will cost your career.
 

Kharma Police

Don't mess with Texas
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Posts
2,099
Total Time
8000
The only problem is Swapa has zero leverage, and the company knows it. This pilot group doesn't have the resolve to do what it takes to get a contract. And now, in mediation (a huge mistake) our hands are tied. If this proposal is turned down you won't see a contract for a Long time. SWA mgmt can look a the mediator and say "we're trying, but the pilots are being stubborn." Meanwhile pilots continue to pick up every scrap of open time there is. If nothing else you guys are an entertaining bunch of morons.

I believe we do have a little leverage in regards to scope and codeshare. I noticed very early on, SWAPA (aka Gary and the gang) kept planting the seed that, "codeshares are fun, hip and exciting!". I think codeshares (aka outsourcing) is already a done deal, our current pesky contract is one obstacle that needs to be changed.
 

redflyer65

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Posts
4,456
Total Time
8000
I believe we do have a little leverage in regards to scope and codeshare. I noticed very early on, SWAPA (aka Gary and the gang) kept planting the seed that, "codeshares are fun, hip and exciting!". I think codeshares (aka outsourcing) is already a done deal, our current pesky contract is one obstacle that needs to be changed.


BINGO, KP. I couldn't agree more. Vote this turd down and sit on your hands for a little while.

Tammy Romo has already tipped their hand to several million in revenue from codeshare. Let them walk those comments back and get back to the table. We have almost iron clad codeshare now. Why give it up for free?
 

Just thinking

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Posts
348
Total Time
>1<10K
Make the profit sharing be based on a quantifiable metric like SEC filings.... You know the ones that they go to jail if they lie about what they report. That way we won't get played from some stupid language they can manipulate with their own numbers. Concrete language with if-then statements to specify exactly what is to occur for any codeshare/interline agreement because that is certainly coming our way. As the Dallas rep stated....they did not spend 650 million on a reservation system for a couple of flights coming from South America. They already have international gates they just need the scope relief so that the southwest pilots can be the feeder to various parts of the U.S. Sad thing is that I will be surprised if it gets defeated by anything more than a 60:40 split. Too many kool aid drinkers and poor leadership. FAT pilots have been dealing with this crap and methodology for years and could provide insight but I do not see RSW pilots or Swapa allowing any of that. There are some brilliant RSW guys putting out great graphs and charts depicting the true value of the offer. It would be nice to see those posted at all of the road shows. Collectively we May be able to educate the masses but it will be an uphill battle.
 
Last edited:

N1atEcon

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2002
Posts
536
Total Time
18000
I will play the Status Quo game for a long time, I couldn't care less. They decided to play the Randy Babbit game not me. And if a FO is willing to sell his soul (section 1) for a pathetic raise I will cast my NO vote to null yours.
 
Last edited:

Tripower455

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Posts
1,357
Total Time
Lots..
It's the FO's that will bring the strong NO vote...get a clue

LOL.. Yeah, right.

I'm flying with a YES! voting FO this trip.

He is ecstatic about the awesome raises and his 2.68 tfp per month "bonus" in lieu of retro, and can't wait to vote YES!

Thinks that the codeshare concessions will really open up the "growth".

Oh, and he's way above a 100K number.
 
Last edited:

MINIME

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Posts
421
Total Time
Some
You better hope it's a little more than the FOs. Ie. the reason you need to be unified. Just an observation; while the FAT guys didn't have the contract that SWA had, whatever they had was vehemently fought for. Personal feelings about each other, need to stop at the water's edge. And, useful experience needs to be put to use.

Fletch717, despite any previous back door deals, if any, there is always leverage. It's called staying with your current contract. What you have now is not a bad document. In my view, you can AFFORD to wait the company out. See who needs who first. Lest not forget, SWA has an image to uphold.
 
Last edited:

HowardBorden

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Posts
889
Total Time
14000+
LOL.. Yeah, right.

I'm flying with a YES! voting FO this trip.

He is ecstatic about the awesome raises and his 2.68 tfp per month "bonus" in lieu of retro, and can't wait to vote YES!

Thinks that the codeshare concessions will really open up the "growth".

Oh, and he's way above a 100K number.
I truly hope you attempted to shed some light on those shortsighted and potentially disastrous misconceptions!
 

Nindiri

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Posts
1,141
Total Time
11000
And that is why GK laughs.

In the very likely event that enough pilots are like that FO and have the SWA Warrior Spirit, it passes and GK wins.

If we vote it down, GK just delays for awhile and enjoys the money he saves until a few more pilots get tired of negotiating. He has plenty of time and can keep chipping away at section one until enough pilots get impatient and give in just to get a raise. Time is on his side. He wins no matter what we do.
 
Top