The logic of relative seniority

[AFcitrus]

EXACTLY. Beyond pay, that fourth stripe is purely ego. If an AT captain takes a pay RAISE to be a SW FO, then any complaint is purely ego-driven.

It's not about an ego my friend. It' s about hard work, making career decision that involved risk, and continuing to maintain the career expectations that one has earned. Career expectations are not about money (as has been noted in previous arbitration awards). They are about seat position and bidding expectations.

Many at AT could have left years ago to pursue SWA (with 737 types in hand). Instead they made concious, well thought out decisions to take a risk and stay at AT to make them the best airline they could be. The reward would be quicker upgrades and better bid position sooner, and most important - higher senority should AT ever merge with another carrier. The sacrifice would be pay, status, and probably some level of job security.

Now that someday has come and it appears the AT pilots' risks may have paid off. They will be integrated far ahead of where they would have been had they left years ago for SWA. They took the risk, just as an investor takes the risk in a business deal. To try to take away the rewards of that risk would be a travesty.

I don't know how this will turn out but I do know a few things:
- This will be decided by the Merger committees for the respective airlines. Failing that an arbitrator(s) will make an unbiased decision based on all the information that both sides present, precedents set forth in previous arbitrations, and federal law.
- Regardless of how this turns out I will bust my butt to help make SW a better company than when arrived.
- We will all enjoy the fruits of an incredible merged airline.

 

[cactusboy53]

Relative seniority rewards the lessers of the airline industry (VA, Republic, AWA, etc.) at the expense of the experienced in the industry (AAA, UAL, CAL, DAL)

Check it out buuuuddddy! None of the SWAL or Air Tranny guys swallowed your bait. Go peddle your "Gold Standard" and DOH w/ C&R's somewhere else, junior. No one's buying what you are selling today (or any other day).

 

[Ty Webb]

EXACTLY. Beyond pay, that fourth stripe is purely ego. If an AT captain takes a pay RAISE to be a SW FO, then any complaint is purely ego-driven.

First, AirTran pay is likely to increase greatly after this weeks' mediated negotiation session, so the argument of AirTran CA versus SWA FO pay is soon to be a moot point.

Second, on the subject of being a Captain versus FO . . . . Sorry, but it is about more than pay and ego. I did my time in the right seat . . . . Some Captains are great to fly with, some can make a four-day seem like a week in purgatory. I'll take my chances flying with the Captain I see in the mirror when I shave, thank you.

And last, you guys who are ignoring precedent from recent SLI arbitrations and have convinced yourselves that an arbitrator is going to displace 800 AirTran Captains are going to be the most upset when the SLI happens, because you have developed expectations that are not based on the reality of recent SLI arbitration.

 

[shootr]

I did my time in the right seat.

Dude, that says it all. Don't suppose there're some SWA FO's who did their time in the right seat and have just as much 121/military PIC as some of you AT CA's? I agree that something fair will be negotiated or it'll go to arbitration but you guys who say SWA guys are arrogant and then post something like that can't see yourselves.

shootr

 

[Ty Webb]

You're misinterpreting what I said. My point was that I remember what it was like being an FO . . . . and it's not the same as CA.

 

[madjack]

So do we suppose it is fair if a 6 year AAI CP gets a huge pay raise and goes ahead of a 6 + year SWA FO?? What is fair and equitable for the SWA FO in this case??

 

[Ty Webb]

So do we suppose it is fair if a 6 year AAI CP gets a huge pay raise and goes ahead of a 6 + year SWA FO?? What is fair and equitable for the SWA FO in this case??

The AAI Captain is continuing what he was doing the day before the merger, he's just now paid the SWA CBA rate for his work.

To try to remove him from a Captain seat to make a "new" captain seat for a SWA FO would be a textbook definition of a windfall . . . taking from one person and giving it to another. I don't think it's likely to happen.

 

[madjack]

Ty,

But in your example the SWA FO loses seniority while the AAI captain gets a huge pay raise...again that does not seem fair and equitable to the SWA FO...

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

The AAI Captain is continuing what he was doing the day before the merger, he's just now paid the SWA CBA rate for his work.

To try to remove him from a Captain seat to make a "new" captain seat for a SWA FO would be a textbook definition of a windfall . . . taking from one person and giving it to another. I don't think it's likely to happen.

Textbook definition of seniority is more like it.

 

[jonjuan]

Ty,

But in your example the SWA FO loses seniority while the AAI captain gets a huge pay raise...again that does not seem fair and equitable to the SWA FO...

Doesn't lose any seniority. 60% F/O to 60% F/O is keeping seniority exactly where it was. NOTHING changes for that F/O, nothing.

 

[OK3]

Doesn't lose any seniority. 60% F/O to 60% F/O is keeping seniority exactly where it was. NOTHING changes for that F/O, nothing.

With respect, something does change for that FO in this case if he works for SWA. The missing factor is the age of the pilots inserted above him (AAI is a younger group). An argument can be made that the new bigger company will also produce fewer upgrade because upgrades for growth are twice as many as for attrition, and growing beyond 700 aircraft will be difficult to do for a number of reasons. This is not as clear cut an argument though.

Another factor not included is the 717s that AAI brings to the transaction. This aircraft does not have a pay rate at SWA yet. It may in fact pay less than the 737. If that is the case a large number of the jobs being brought over are not worth as much to SWA pilots, further damaging a current SWA pilot.

 

[madjack]

Jonjuan,

Ok, the SWAFO keeps his relative seniority and pay, the AAI CP gets a huge pay raise (plus 3000 more FOs behind him)...that sounds like a windfall to the AAI CP and no gain for the SWAFO...not likely to happen either.

 

[shootr]

Another factor not included is the 717s that AAI brings to the transaction. This aircraft does not have a pay rate at SWA yet. It may in fact pay less than the 737.

THIS is the issue that has yet to have much discussion. Anybody who thinks it's a given that 717 pay at SWA will equal 737 pay, does not know SWA management. It's not how any of us want it to go down but it is VERY possible. A lower payscale with a 5 year fence would not shock me, at all. I'd vote against it, but it could pass.

shootr

 

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

Then I guess the 300 should pay less. When do u guys vote on that?

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

There will likely be some complicated compromise. Due to the vast disparity in payscales, AT captains without enough longevity to hold CA at SWA are not likely to keep their seats. They will still, however, realize a pay raise or be protected. The AAI pay rates effective in September when the deal was announced will be the ones used for negotiations.

 

[shootr]

Then I guess the 300 should pay less. When do u guys vote on that?

We're about to vote on a sideletter for ALL 737's (including -800's) at one pay rate.

-300's have the same number of seats as -700's. Maybe you're thinking of the -500's (122 seats versus 137). I wouldn't be shocked to see all the -500's gone during the transition and replaced with the Mexicana 717's. I have not heard any of these things from any reliable sources. All speculation.

 

[Ty Webb]

There will likely be some complicated compromise. Due to the vast disparity in payscales, AT captains without enough longevity to hold CA at SWA are not likely to keep their seats. They will still, however, realize a pay raise or be protected. The AAI pay rates effective in September when the deal was announced will be the ones used for negotiations.

Everything you posted is at odds with recent arbitrated SLI's, but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

[madjack]

Every SLI is unique...recent (DAL/NWA) SLI may be very different than a AAI/SWA integration due to:

- Disparity in pay
- Dispartity in longevity of the companies
- Disparity in size

These factors will be have to be considered by the AAI/SWA NCs because they will certainly be considered if it goes to arbitration.

 

[Cometman]

Every SLI is unique...recent (DAL/NWA) SLI may be very different than a AAI/SWA integration due to:

- Disparity in pay
- Dispartity in longevity of the companies
- Disparity in size

These factors will be have to be considered by the AAI/SWA NCs because they will certainly be considered if it goes to arbitration.

I have a question for anybody that thinks he is an expert in this field. I would assume that both sides have to get a transition agreement with their respective company before they start on the SLI. At what point do the both sides agree if it will be handled by 1 arbritraitor or a panel of 3? Is that a choice they have ? If so, if they disagree does it go to arbitration? It seems like it can be a never ending task.

Thanks

 

[AFcitrus]

Hose,

After reading many of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you have no intent other than to spread mis-information. Having an opinion is fine. Blatant faulty information though is a horse of a different color. I encourage everyone here to go back and read SLI arbitration precedent. Then we can have an intelligent chat based on facts instead of one man's mis-informed opinion.

 

[Cometman]

Hose,

After reading many of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you have no intent other than to spread mis-information. Having an opinion is fine. Blatant faulty information though is a horse of a different color. I encourage everyone here to go back and read SLI arbitration precedent. Then we can have an intelligent chat based on facts instead of one man's mis-informed opinion.

Since you are an expert maybe you can answer this question:

I have a question for anybody that thinks he is an expert in this field. I would assume that both sides have to get a transition agreement with their respective company before they start on the SLI. At what point do the both sides agree if it will be handled by 1 arbritraitor or a panel of 3? Is that a choice they have ? If so, if they disagree does it go to arbitration? It seems like it can be a never ending task.

Thanks

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

I said "not likely". I thought that implied "opinion".

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

Hose,

After reading many of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you have no intent other than to spread mis-information. Having an opinion is fine. Blatant faulty information though is a horse of a different color. I encourage everyone here to go back and read SLI arbitration precedent. Then we can have an intelligent chat based on facts instead of one man's mis-informed opinion.

I said "not likely". I thought that implied "opinion". All of my posts carry the opinion that we will likely find something fair for all of us. No one needs to get hosed here.

 

[FlyinGuy]

Ty, Your new rates will not apply to the decision. There was a snapshot taken the day of the merger and everything will be based on that. SWA might get a raise in a few days too, but that will not be included either.

 

[Just thinking]

Southwest Airlines reached a tentative agreement Thursday with its 5,800 pilots represented by the Southwest Airlines Pilots Assn. on switching some future 737-700 deliveries to -800s.
According to SWAPA, the agreement includes "a single pay rate for the 737, profitability-based raise added to the hard 2% raise in 2011, a contract extension with an amendable date extended to September 2012, and a profitability-based raise in 2012."

Has to go to vote. I am certain that the international portion of the future expansion will hinge dramatically on the 800's. This will be conveyed by your union leadership. You will have a pay raise without taking a single delivery of an 800. OK to pay Southwest pilots the same rate for 122/137 seats but can't pay the same for an aircraft that can be configured with 120-125?????? The 737-800 seats 162 passengers in a typical two-class layout, or up to 189 in one class.

For arguments sake lets meet in the middle on the 800 seating and make it 175 seats. More than a 50 seat difference from the 500 and almost 40 from the 300. You want to penalize the 717 crews because they have between (-7 to +3) seats depending on configuration for the 737-500 or (-20 to -12) seats compared to the 737-300. Take the rate and divide it by the seats on the 717 and the 737 (300/500/700/800). Now you have a rate that is dependant upon seat capacity and will pay accordingly. You can further differentiate the pay when it comes to overwater or international overrides. Does a 717 crew have LESS liability than a 735 crew? Does a 735 crew have LESS liability than a 737 crew?

You should be careful about cutting out crews because they carry less pax.... it could be used against you in future negotiations by the company.... if it is good for the goose it is good for the gander. I woud venture to bet that the 500's will be around a bit longer than what was previously expected. Expansion will come pretty quick when all of the markets start to interconnect.

 

[FO 4 Life]

I'll throw something in as an outsider since I rode on a SWA plane yesterday and the senior captain doesn't think anything will affect him.

Everyone on here keeps talking about pay. If you look at arbitrators decisions regarding seniority lists, a lot of it has to do with career expectations. Not so much pay, but that is part of it.

Career expectations for both are 737 captain. That's it. The real fly in the ointment I believe, is that an arbitrator may look at the fact Airtran sort of does international. Is that a higher career expectation?

 

[shootr]

You want to penalize the 717 crews...

No, I do not. But management might.

 

[OK3]

Southwest Airlines reached a tentative agreement Thursday with its 5,800 pilots represented by the Southwest Airlines Pilots Assn. on switching some future 737-700 deliveries to -800s.
According to SWAPA, the agreement includes "a single pay rate for the 737, profitability-based raise added to the hard 2% raise in 2011, a contract extension with an amendable date extended to September 2012, and a profitability-based raise in 2012."

Has to go to vote. I am certain that the international portion of the future expansion will hinge dramatically on the 800's. This will be conveyed by your union leadership. You will have a pay raise without taking a single delivery of an 800. OK to pay Southwest pilots the same rate for 122/137 seats but can't pay the same for an aircraft that can be configured with 120-125?????? The 737-800 seats 162 passengers in a typical two-class layout, or up to 189 in one class.


For arguments sake lets meet in the middle on the 800 seating and make it 175 seats. More than a 50 seat difference from the 500 and almost 40 from the 300. You want to penalize the 717 crews because they have between (-7 to +3) seats depending on configuration for the 737-500 or (-20 to -12) seats compared to the 737-300. Take the rate and divide it by the seats on the 717 and the 737 (300/500/700/800). Now you have a rate that is dependant upon seat capacity and will pay accordingly. You can further differentiate the pay when it comes to overwater or international overrides. Does a 717 crew have LESS liability than a 735 crew? Does a 735 crew have LESS liability than a 737 crew?

You should be careful about cutting out crews because they carry less pax.... it could be used against you in future negotiations by the company.... if it is good for the goose it is good for the gander. I woud venture to bet that the 500's will be around a bit longer than what was previously expected. Expansion will come pretty quick when all of the markets start to interconnect.

I did not mean to imply that I "want" a lower pay rate for anything. I am simply bringing up the possibility that this may be an issue. We have a very small number of 737-500s (around 25 or 5% of the fleet). The company so far has had little incentive to fight us over another, lower pay scale for smaller equipment. Bringing on almost 100 smaller airframes is going to be another matter. Compound this with the different economics of 717 airframe and I think the company is going to want to pay us less to fly it. Not emotional, just possible.

 

[scoreboardII]

Not emotional, just possible.

You mean probable, as AT now has a second payscale for 717, right?

 

[instructordude]

I'll throw something in as an outsider since I rode on a SWA plane yesterday and the senior captain doesn't think anything will affect him.

Everyone on here keeps talking about pay. If you look at arbitrators decisions regarding seniority lists, a lot of it has to do with career expectations. Not so much pay, but that is part of it.

Career expectations for both are 737 captain. That's it. The real fly in the ointment I believe, is that an arbitrator may look at the fact Airtran sort of does international. Is that a higher career expectation?

Career expectation is EVERYTHING. Capt is the pinnacle of a career and this is why Airtran pilots will maintain threre CApt positions. Anything else is an ridicuolous and against federal law as mandated by the McCain/Allegeney Act. Get use to it. It's federal law.