SWAPA wins grievance with company

[SWA Bubba]

They're going to be busy in that training center - They will have to train 800 AirTran transitions in the last 4 months of the year. Plus the upgrades, plus any new hires.

Sound plan.

I agree. It almost sounds like a plan that a pilot might come up with!

Bubba

 

[CptMurf]

Yes, such a great "culture" you guys HAD there.

Fixed it for you

 

[Mk3tm]

You can't grieve something that you already gave away due to cowardice.

No, ALPA guided that debacle right over the cliff and treated the pilots like mushrooms. The 850 AT capts would be keeping those seats thru it all, and at SWA rates, but no.

Nice going!

 

[FIREMAN]

No, ALPA guided that debacle right over the cliff and treated the pilots like mushrooms. The 850 AT capts would be keeping those seats thru it all, and at SWA rates, but no.

Nice going!

Do you really believe SLI-1 would have unfolded the way it was written? Very little of SLI-2 has gone as voted on. Both were written with loopholes designed to "capture" captain seats.

 

[IBNAV8R]

You can't grieve something that you already gave away due to cowardice.

Can you explain that to the USAPA types?

 

[Mk3tm]

Do you really believe SLI-1 would have unfolded the way it was written? Very little of SLI-2 has gone as voted on. Both were written with loopholes designed to "capture" captain seats.

Well, the capt seat thing was a major part of ALPA's argument in the DRC arb. ALPA explained to the arbitrator that the capt seats, along with the 10 yr ATL fence and the SWA pay, were the heart of the first SLI agreement. ALPA explained how the capt slots would have stayed with the pilots to which they were attached even if the 717 went away and the capt crossed to SWA to be a 73 capt. That's how you end up with the arbitrator ruling that "all these remedies you're asking for now you had in SLI1 but your MEC didn't let the pilots vote on it".

So, I'm just taking ALPA's word for it. The lawyer who represented us in the DRC was Katz, the merger counsel from the SLI negotiation, so he's got knowledge.

Hey, that's prob why the ATL capt rep in July/Aug '11 was running around saying "the MEC has to vote this down cuz if it goes out to the pilots for a vote, it'll pass". She was right.

 

[PCL_128]

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc. Get over it.

 

[FIREMAN]

Well, the capt seat thing was a major part of ALPA's argument in the DRC arb. ALPA explained to the arbitrator that the capt seats, along with the 10 yr ATL fence and the SWA pay, were the heart of the first SLI agreement. ALPA explained how the capt slots would have stayed with the pilots to which they were attached even if the 717 went away and the capt crossed to SWA to be a 73 capt. That's how you end up with the arbitrator ruling that "all these remedies you're asking for now you had in SLI1 but your MEC didn't let the pilots vote on it".

So, I'm just taking ALPA's word for it. The lawyer who represented us in the DRC was Katz, the merger counsel from the SLI negotiation, so he's got knowledge.

Hey, that's prob why the ATL capt rep in July/Aug '11 was running around saying "the MEC has to vote this down cuz if it goes out to the pilots for a vote, it'll pass". She was right.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[HowardBorden]

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc. Get over it.

Does that evidence come from the exact same group of people that you claim demanded AIP1 killed without a vote before they demanded they should have been allowed a vote on AIP1?

 

[SWA Bubba]

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc. Get over it.

Too bad. If you had let it go to a vote, and it had failed like you now say it would have, then you would have gotten the arbitration that you wanted all along. That's what GK's "hardball" was all about--from the start, he made it clear that he wanted all the pilots to vote.

Bubba

 

[RLAblows]

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc. Get over it.

you are so full of sh!t. They were recalled by what percentage again? It looked like one of the largest voter turnouts our council ever had. Plus our vice chair said at the recall meeting, "I don't have time to go through all my emails or voice mails."

You seem to live by a motto of, "here's another fact I just made up."

 

[PCL_128]

Does that evidence come from the exact same group of people that you claim demanded AIP1 killed without a vote before they demanded they should have been allowed a vote on AIP1?

The pilots did an abrupt 180 as soon as Gary started making his threats publicly. The very same people who sent emails, made phone calls, even made long speeches at the MEC meeting against sending the agreement out for a vote suddenly tucked tail and cowered in the corner. Unfortunately for them, no matter how much they insist that they were always in favor of the deal going out for a vote, their emails live in on perpetuity showing the truth.

 

[PCL_128]

Too bad. If you had let it go to a vote, and it had failed like you now say it would have, then you would have gotten the arbitration that you wanted all along. That's what GK's "hardball" was all about--from the start, he made it clear that he wanted all the pilots to vote.

Bubba

I didn't give a sh!t then what Gary wanted, and I still don't.

 

[Kharma Police]

I didn't give a sh!t then what Gary wanted, and I still don't.

Again, you're quitting so why do you care?

 

[HowardBorden]

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc.

Does that evidence come from the exact same group of people that you claim demanded AIP1 killed without a vote before they demanded they should have been allowed a vote on AIP1?

The pilots did an abrupt 180 as soon as Gary started making his threats publicly.

You made my point for me. You can't claim the evidence shows AIP1 would have failed due to the sentiment of the group when the exact group you are referencing very loudly demanded a vote should have been given and punctuated that stance with a recall of the officials that denied the vote!

 

[Mk3tm]

PCl has offered some info of actual value here.

The pilots did an abrupt 180 as soon as Gary started making his threats publicly. The very same people who sent emails, made phone calls, even made long speeches at the MEC meeting against sending the agreement out for a vote suddenly tucked tail and cowered in the corner. Unfortunately for them, no matter how much they insist that they were always in favor of the deal going out for a vote, their emails live in on perpetuity showing the truth.

Key word "publicly". The status reps and the merger committee and the ALPA staff had all that info way before the vote bc GK had briefed them in Dallas. But they didn't tell us all that.

In fact, the status reps and the EVP made sure GK's briefing was not quoted to the pilots. The Merger Committee SIC described it in detail on our forum later how the EVP and status reps went out of their way to cover it up. The MC chairman apparently went along. Thanks again.

All of the evidence was that the first agreement would have failed significantly. Email records, attendance at the meeting, phone calls records, etc. Get over it.

The meeting, singular. One meeting, attended by maybe 200 guys, on the most career-changing decision of your life. I was there. Of those 200, maybe 75% were against but, as you just admitted above, they'd have thought differently if ALPA had been honest.

I didn't give a sh!t then what Gary wanted, and I still don't.

That doesn't match what the Merger Comm SIC said on our forum. He said our EVP joined in squashing publication of the GK threats by saying, "we owe GK confidentiality". Sounds like the pilots took a back seat to GK.

 

[SWA Bubba]

I didn't give a sh!t then what Gary wanted, and I still don't.

Too bad.

Too bad you didn't go along with the intent of what you agreed to do in the PA. You would have gotten what you really wanted--arbitration--and, you would have avoided a lot of the crap that's going on now. That is, of course, if the first agreement really would have "failed significantly."

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

You made my point for me. You can't claim the evidence shows AIP1 would have failed due to the sentiment of the group when the exact group you are referencing very loudly demanded a vote should have been given and punctuated that stance with a recall of the officials that denied the vote!

You're missing the key point, Howie: the group changed their opinion only after Gary made his threats public. Up until that point, the group was adamantly opposed to the SIA. It's unlikely that Gary would have started issuing threats in the middle of a vote on SIA1, so the vote almost certainly would have failed. Which, I believe, is what Gary wanted all along, anyway.

 

[redflyer65]

Your right PCL.

ALPA should have kept those threats secret from it's membership.

Good job!

 

[PCL_128]

Your right PCL.

ALPA should have kept those threats secret from it's membership.

Good job!

ALPA didn't keep any threats secret. The threats merely became more "direct" after the SIA was voted down. It was all very vague before then. But the vague threats were in the MC's presentation. They were so vague, however, that some members of the MEC didn't even consider them to be threats at all.