SWAPA TA2 heads to the membership for a vote.

[cksport]

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/prnewswire/200909171715PR_NEWS_USPR_____DA77845.htm

 

[shearedshaft]

Looks like I was wrong, and SWAPA was able to fix all of the gotcha's in the last agreement. It cost a bunch of money, but from the sounds of things, we're about to get a nice raise and a whole bunch of codeshare protections.

 

[RedDogC130]

I will believe it when I see it...if it is the same raises as the AIP then we got screwed on pay versus the TA1

 

[shearedshaft]

It sounds like they fixed codeshare, ELITT, grandfathered the lances and still got six percent.

As far as I can tell, they simply pushed a 2% raise off 2 years to gain the codeshare and everything else. that's ok.

 

[shootr]

Sheared, you really want that retro check! Gotta see the language, myself. Then I'll decide.

shootr

 

[shearedshaft]

The raise looks the same, just timed differently. I really wanted the codeshare stuff, I have no idea what the language says this time. 6% is 6%, with the lances grandfathered, it sounds good.

 

[Daddy]

The raise looks the same, just timed differently. I really wanted the codeshare stuff, I have no idea what the language says this time. 6% is 6%, with the lances grandfathered, it sounds good.

The sad part is that you just can't comprehend the math behind the difference between the 2 TA's

 

[shearedshaft]

The sad part is that you just can't comprehend the math behind the difference between the 2 TA's

Are you a lance?

 

[ableone]

If the total package is less ( I understand that it is ) then you guys would be certifiably insane to vote yes.

If the package is indeed less than the first T.A. and your union leadership is recommending it, they need to be replaced as well.

 

[shootr]

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

 

[tathagatha]

SWAPA leadership needs to go regardless...

 

[FlyinGuy]

I would have liked to see 3% across the board for the raises, but that just is not going to happen. What is more important at this stage of the game is our Section 1 protections. Our last contract was negotiated in 1994! There was so much to clean up, that we were not able to focus our efforts on one particular area that we wanted more of (ie pay). I will wait till I see the details, but my guess is that this dude is going to pass by 65-70%.

 

[airlinepilot]

Yes, we need some NEW BLOOD and no more 4 digit please

 

[gobyebye]

Although this will cost the company less than TA1, it fixes the things that were supposedly the reason for not voting in TA1. The pay is a little different but according to everyone prior to TA1, it's not about the money, right? Now that the QOL issues were fixed, it's suddenly about the money. Personnally, I think this TA, from what I have seen is the best of both worlds. It provides the company with an added savings and fixes the issues that were most important to us. Plus it increases our retirement match sooner than TA1 (long term financial benefits are worth more to me than short term gains).

 

[shearedshaft]

I'm waiting for the lances to start saying "thanks". I'm afraid we'll just get more demands.

I'm taking bets.

 

[shootr]

Sheared,

Why should they say thanks to you? You voted to do away with them. They can feel free to thank me, though.

For those outsiders who think we may be crazy to vote yes on an TA with less money in pay-rates than the 1st TA, you have no idea how good the section 1 improvements are. How many unions have the following scope/codeshare provisions?

-no far international codeshare
-near international codeshare not to exceed 4% ASM unless we are also flying near international, then it's a 1 to 1 ratio
-NO RJ codeshare
-ALL SWA flying must be done by SWAPA (no SWA connect or express allowed)

...after all this, we still get a couple of 2% raises, plus our retro, plus a bump-up of senior FO pay rates, plus a 2% increase on our 401K matching (9.3%) as of Jan '10. Like I said before, I still may vote yes or no. I think either vote is justified. I'll wait for the final language to make my choice. Sound like I can live with the outcome if we vote yes as a group.

shootr

 

[shearedshaft]

So you are a lance.

 

[shootr]

No. How do you figure? Sometimes I wonder if you even read posts made by others.

 

[shootr]

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

 

[Capn Butthead]

I dont know what to think....I voted no last time because of Codeshare, Elitt and the lance program. Im thankful that we grandfathered the lances..It was the right thing to do. Elitt changes seem nice. But codeshare still bugs me. We do over 1 billion seat miles a month! (forgot the exact number) Doesnt anyone realize that 4% of that number will be a lot of codeshare!!!!! I have to READ THE TA before i vote on it but im leaning to no for codeshare. We will see after I read it.

And fwiw...why are we not doing far international codeshare???? We arent getting 777's anyday soon so why are we limiting our passenger flow by not codesharing with someone like Cathay, Air China, Virgin, or anyone like that??? Jetblue is codesharing with lufthansa and they are greatly improving the number of pax available to them...I just dont understand it....