Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWAPA TA failure just cost me $1,200 per month

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I would give up $1200 a month to keep ELITT the way it is. That is how I keep my flexibility. Hey maybe we will get 3% like every other group got...happy now. You like the new open time process without a test to see if it works? So as a senior FO are you not going to be a Lance when the time comes? Get your head out of the clouds. This is supposed to be what is good for the "group" not "you" There are things that we each give up to make it better....quit your crying you will get the COLA just have to wait a bit. They will not come back with less because they will surely get another NO vote with a bigger margin
 
Boo-hoo...$1,200 a month. You want something to b!tch about? Try Age 65. How much did that cost you???
 
Last edited:
I am a senior FO at SWA and my pay rate was scheduled to go from $108 to $121 after the TA (from about $120/hour to $135/hr).

I fly 120 trips per month, so the TA failure cost me $1,200 per month. Every month.

Would I write a check for $1,200 per month to keep ELITT the same? Nope. How about to let lance captains continue to take senior FO lines and give them to junior FOs? Nope.

This is the interesting part: I've asked every FO I've come in contact with in the last week what they thought their gross pay raise was going to be if the TA passed. Not one had an answer.

Luckily, SWA just announced 9% lower revenues for last month, so I'm sure our pay raises will be even better (not) when we go back to the table.

You guys don't know a good thing when it's looking you in the eye.



There is more to the contract that "your" raise. How about
  • almost limitless near international codeshare
  • no flying to hawaii or carribean for you
  • no "one leg on SWA" codeshare
  • unlimited distribution of other airlines tickets
  • whacked lance program
  • more restricted DTC
  • much more restricted ELITT
  • worse Reserve system
  • no cancellation pay
  • loss of mach adjustment
  • unknown open time system
  • worse raises than any other SWA workgroup
  • worse retirement than the Flight Attendants
It's not all about you bro. How about trying to pull the rope in the same direction.

Gup
 
Last edited:
Scope? You don't need that. Management will take care of you. They think of you first!

Keep that head in the sand- at least 51% of your homies had sense enough to keep SWA Connection from starting.

Ask the legacy guys around here how little that 1200 dollars a month would look compared to the cuts they've taken.
Protect your SCOPE guys. It is the only way to protect your future income and jobs.
 
Protect your SCOPE guys. It is the only way to protect your future income and jobs.

Exactly. 1200 a month will be gone when your jobs start to be outsourced. Look at the mistakes made by Delta, NWA, United, etc. How many more pilots would be at the mainline with tighter scope? How many more FOs would be captains?

I would not sell out my pilot group for 1200 a month. Sadly, our MEC would.
 
How does voting no help my scope? If you have seen the contact, you'd realize that the failed TA restricted all domestic code share. It didn't restrict near-international by any reasonable amount, but that market is tiny.

So voting no, was in effect, a vote "yes" to allow SWA to domestic code share (there is no restriction other than a side letter with an easy out for the company). Voting yes was voting to restrict it, voting no was a vote to allow it, at least in the near term.

So no, me writing a check each and every month for $1,200 so we can have weaker code share restrictions is not in my best interest.

And to those guys that think we're now going to get 15% raises instead of my 10%, dream on. Did you read the headlines? SWA revenue down almost 10% last month?

Why would I vote no for a 10% raise in the hopes I'd get a 15%? That is greedy.
 
If someone voted no just on the sheer dislike of the raise is absolutely selfish and assenine. Look back at what Gup wrote and you'll see the big picture. His list is pretty much the same as mine. Besides, decreased flying means you'll have to work your a_s off to make 120 TFP which is NOT a raise....it's falling into the company's hands of what they want you to do...make more by working substantially more.

I'm more about protecting work rules than dollars. The dollars will come later if you protect your work rules. Unfortunately, 60% of the captains didn't look at this TA in terms of "how does this affect the F/O's" they looked at it as "This TA doesn't affect me much, so I'll vote YES." Some unity we have.
 
How does voting no help my scope? If you have seen the contact, you'd realize that the failed TA restricted all domestic code share. It didn't restrict near-international by any reasonable amount, but that market is tiny.

So voting no, was in effect, a vote "yes" to allow SWA to domestic code share (there is no restriction other than a side letter with an easy out for the company). Voting yes was voting to restrict it, voting no was a vote to allow it, at least in the near term.

So no, me writing a check each and every month for $1,200 so we can have weaker code share restrictions is not in my best interest.

And to those guys that think we're now going to get 15% raises instead of my 10%, dream on. Did you read the headlines? SWA revenue down almost 10% last month?

Why would I vote no for a 10% raise in the hopes I'd get a 15%? That is greedy.

Friend, the ONLY reason we got such iron-clad language on domestic code-share is because the company has NO PLANS to code share with another airline in the domestic markets! If RJs had a place in the low-cost airline business model of SWA, trust me, we would have had them a long time ago. They make even less sense in the depressed-yield environment we are in now.
 
I am a senior FO at SWA and my pay rate was scheduled to go from $108 to $121 after the TA (from about $120/hour to $135/hr).

I fly 120 trips per month, so the TA failure cost me $1,200 per month. Every month.

Would I write a check for $1,200 per month to keep ELITT the same? Nope. How about to let lance captains continue to take senior FO lines and give them to junior FOs? Nope.

This is the interesting part: I've asked every FO I've come in contact with in the last week what they thought their gross pay raise was going to be if the TA passed. Not one had an answer.

Luckily, SWA just announced 9% lower revenues for last month, so I'm sure our pay raises will be even better (not) when we go back to the table.

You guys don't know a good thing when it's looking you in the eye.


Anyone else think General Lee just created a new handle on here to stir things up???:)

if not, this guy is so clueless its scary that he got his atp.
Mookie
 

Latest resources

Back
Top