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

The new Airtran merger symbol

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
Well Music, if your MC negotiated the $$ and now you want the seniority, that pretty much IS getting everything?
 
Well Music, if your MC negotiated the $$ and now you want the seniority, that pretty much IS getting everything?

LOL! I know it does seem like double speak but all I'm saying as I wouldn't need all of the protections for my seat if the if SLI was a bit better. In other words, if I got bumped out of my seat as a result of my actual system seniority and not forced to do it because of QOL reasons, then I would be more apt to look at that than what's in front of me. The reason is that it would represent a more typical upgrade path while allowing me to utilize my seniority in a way that would be better for my family.
 
Honestly, I think SWAPA and ALPA screwed up trying to save every AT capt seat. They should have settled for a little more seniority for the AT pilots and allowed some SWA FOs to upgrade. I know this would have costed SWA more money, but ultimately would have made more people happy on both sides.
 
I'm insulted that Mr. Wilson 2005 hire keeps his seat over our 2001 hires. I am also flabbergasted that ALPA is screwing him out of ANY longevity bump when Mr. Wilson is downgraded to FO for Ty's return to the line.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Wilson is a no vote.

Gup
 
Honestly, I think SWAPA and ALPA screwed up trying to save every AT capt seat. They should have settled for a little more seniority for the AT pilots and allowed some SWA FOs to upgrade. I know this would have costed SWA more money, but ultimately would have made more people happy on both sides.


I agree 100%. Seems like it would make both sides happier.
 
Honestly, I think SWAPA and ALPA screwed up trying to save every AT capt seat. They should have settled for a little more seniority for the AT pilots and allowed some SWA FOs to upgrade. I know this would have costed SWA more money, but ultimately would have made more people happy on both sides.

This is what I'm trying to say, more or less. IMHO, that would be more 'equitable' for both sides. 'Fair', well that's a lot harder to quantify as everyone is looking from a different perspective.
 
That's great for situation Music- and I honestly don't want you to spend less time at home- but that didn't answer my question- how many AT pilots have delayed upgrade for QOL? You have 1600 pilots, there is surely an answer in there-
No one did bc you didn't pay FOs well enough to ever turn down an upgrade- until we bought you-

Years ago, I put off upgrade for a year for QOL issues, it was about a $65 an hour difference IIRC.
 
To the OP, nice post! I luv it!!

I have not been lurking here much these last couple weeks.

It seems pretty much both sides are pissed off with this AIP / SLI.

Mission accomplished I suppose.

Good luck to us all.

-C
 
Well Music, if your MC negotiated the $$ and now you want the seniority, that pretty much IS getting everything?

Should the AT guys get less money? GK is signing the paychecks, not SWAPA. So far successful mergers have finished the joint contract, with equal pay for same sized planes, prior to negotiating the SLI. Too bad you didn't go that route. Godspeed!


OYS
 
Should the AT guys get less money? GK is signing the paychecks, not SWAPA. So far successful mergers have finished the joint contract, with equal pay for same sized planes, prior to negotiating the SLI. Too bad you didn't go that route. Godspeed!


OYS

Let me help you out with this matter.

Had both cbas been closer together in similarities, then a potential joint cba could have been part of the process. Why would both groups want to give up substantial gains in the end agreement? Airtran controlled that process with their strike vote and ratified cba. They could have negotiated an agreement much more in parity. I'll admit hypothetical in many ways. That would have potentially allowed for the process. Moot point.

Case in point. Do you recall when Mesa was looking to purchase aca? Why did the aca pilots feel the way they did? It would have triggered a joint cba.

Second...

See alpa merger policy. See Swapa merger policy.

In closing, we can put this matter to rest.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top