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 TA2 heads to the membership for a vote.

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
It just seems that four out of five active posters are lances, I'm predispositioned to think, "There goes another lance complaining."

sorry to lump you in.
 
Didn't the cost of living go up by 5.8 percent in 2008 alone? Just saying we all need to realize that inflation is a big issue, this was the largest increase since 1981.
 
Not much was said about the money in TA1, but now that is all that is important. I know some guys think we can get it all, but this sounds like an acceptable agreement.
 
The people that want more money at our company (SWA) need to chill, pick up the latest June edition of PROFESSIONAL PILOT. In the back of the mag is a section of domestic/international pay rates for commercial and biz aircraft. It gives you a better out look, So open your eyes and see how good we have it already on pay and some. Don't be greedy. Look at UA back in 99-2000. We are not going to sink this ship. Yes I voted no on the last contract, but it was all take for the company in section 1 and the % for codeshare. This one is a give or take. It's only fair. For the people that have not done the all night bumping in weather freight hualing, long military missions, regional turd flying or straight 135/91k bag loading carpet cleaning lav dumping 6 legs a day doing every thing job,You should go try it then you will be telling your self SH!T I had it real good at Ol SWA.
 
Oh, and another thing for outsiders that are interested in our contract...

Are you hoping we'll hold the bar for the rest of you in your next negotiations? If we get 2% raises on industry leading narrow body pay rates, consider it done. Now it's your turn!

shootr

I'm simply glad you guys voted NO the first time around. I know one pilot group that probably doesn't even have the stones to do that.
 
Well every lance I fly with now on better buy my beer on the overnights.....after all I probably pick up their trip
 
I do. I am always calm and rational but I tell it like it is and let people I fly with and work with know why I think what I think. This is how I should be.
 
Well every lance I fly with now on better buy my beer on the overnights.....after all I probably pick up their trip

You sure should, since you already bought his beer. $40 million to grandfather the lances works out to $6,900 per SWAPA pilot. That's a chunk of change, and as mentioned, not one "thanks" yet, have you noticed?

Lots of, "I can't believe we're limited to (whatever) number of duty periods", or "I can't believe I can't use ELITT to trade my line down below 65, there's nothing illegal about parking trips."

What's your opinion on whether grandfathering those guys were worth seven grand?
 
Granfathering the lances was NOT all about the 200 or so lances. For me, doing away with them was just another way of taking current flying done by the FO's to the CA side. Junior FO's are getting good turns from the lances. The former lances would have kept this flying, thus keeping more open time available to the senior side of the CA list. Due to flexibility loss, I also think it would have had a negative impact on junior CA's. Who would take their F-S-Su 19.5 trip, allowing them to pick up something better? Keeping the lances for now is helpful to the bottom 2/3 of the entire seniority list.
 
I was a no voter and may very well be a no voter, again. However, I am open to the idea that the QOL/scheduling fixes may have more value than the SLIGHT loss in pay from TA1 to TA2. Waiting for the final language...

Who do you work for, able? Just sayin'...

shootr

I am not talking about the pay rates. I agree that scheduling enhancements may be well worth a lower hourly, or in your case trip rate.

I am talking about the overall price of the package. It is my understanding that the TA2 package is worth millions less than the TA1 package. If this is true you would be well advised to vote no, regardless of how you voted in TA1.

If TA2 is worth less than TA1 and you approve it the company will know that in the future they can always win 50%+1 by threatening that should the membership vote no, the next package will be worth less.

You don't want them operating this way. You will be at a strategic disadvantage in every future negotiation.
 
Last edited:
No, I read them. Sorry to bunch you in with the lances, it just seems that four out of five forum posters on both TA1 and now TA2 are lances complaining.

Sheared,
I feel the same way as shootr...you do not seem to be comprehending some of the concepts here and just defaulting to an answer that everyone must be a lance if they are posting here.

For all,
There is not much to discuss on this TA...it is going to pass by at least a 2 to 1 margin. We were not able to gain that much in pay because of the pay rates of other narrowbody pilots. We did make gains in other areas like scope and that will have to do for now. I think most in SWAPA will agree that we could have done better, but not with the current SWAPA leadership. We'll try again in a couple years with a new BoD and front office.
 
Outsider question: Where are all the foam-at-the-mouth senior folks who were screaming "we'll never do this well on a new TA. Gary is laughing at us" when TA 1 failed? Sounds to me like the TA 1 no voters got it right.
 
Most yes voters I have spoken to agree that the no vote was useful and helpful to our cause. Of course hindsight is 20/20. Easy to say we (the no voters) were right after seeing what happened.
 
When is the vote?

Opens 2 OCT
Closes 1 NOV

prediction PASS 74%-26%

Me...voted no the first time around...will probably vote yes this time. This contract was not about pay rates for me. It was all about scope and codeshare. After looking at TA 1 some other things [open time, ELITT, ETC] came to light. They appearantly have fixed most of the things that caused me to vote no.

Just from talking to folks around campus, I suspect there are many people that voted no the first time around that feel the same way I do. It is time to put this one behind us.:smash:
 

Latest resources

Back
Top