This is how ugly an SLI can be. Watch out SWA

[27 driver]

SWAPA and ALPA will agree upon the topics they can agree upon and the arbitrator will decide the rest. This deal in no way resembles the East/West deal. I may be naive but I believe that both unions will play hard ball but in the end will hash out most of the details. It is our unions job to fight hard for their pilot groups. Just business. After that we will all have to accept whatever the arbitrator decides.

 

[Sy-bill]

McCaskell/Bond is not written to guarantee relative seniority as what seems to be alluded to. It is there to prevent another AA/TWA situation.

Every seniority merger/integration has its very own merits. There is a snapshot taken at the time of the announcement so that contracts are not changed to dilute issues like pay differences. The new Airtran contract will have no effect on negotiations or judgements. The 50% + pay difference is what will be considered.

There is no precedence with the SWA/AT integration post M/B. And I can assume that if Swapa does not like where the negotiations are going, they can stretch this out for years and years to their benefit. They must agree on arbitration.

For both of your groups, interesting times could be ahead.

 

[ivauir]

And those two cases aren't even remotely recent or applicable. JA had 10 airplanes, and Muse 16. But whatever helps you sleep at night.

Number of airplanes? When has that been relevant? Never.

Even if it was - look at the ratios of the acquired companies vs the parent companies. The examples I cited are very similar to this transaction. Very much apples to apples and far more relevant than the examples you posted.

Like I state: there is NO precedent for a 20 increase in longevity, 50% pay raise and relative seniority. It's a "triple lindy" - it has never been done.

It would be beyond windfall to translate seniority in a 117 seat aircraft, under a regressive contract in ATL into equivalent seniority in a 137/175 seat aircraft, under the industry's richest contract in Phoenix.

Let's play nice and move along.

 

[Dan Roman]

After that we will all have to accept whatever the arbitrator decides.

Which is exactly what the USAPA folks said they would do and than reneged when they didn't like result. They have given up a lot of money and opportunity for that little faux pau.

 

[Lear70]

Are we really going to go over all this again?

How much more can be said that hasn't already been said?

Moderator hat on:

As far as being allowed to post, as long as MCDU stays within the ToS, he's free to post in the appropriate forums. This thread is comparing SWA/AAI to AWA/UAir, all of which are Major airlines, it's in the Majors forum, so discuss all you want.

/mod

 

[SWA2000]

I'm not a smart man...so can anybody explain to me why if it will probably be up to the arbitrator to decide, why hasn't the AW + US been cleared up. Didn't an arbitrator decide on that matter? So, whats to say that the SW or AT pilots has to except what an arbitrator decides?

When I was hired, my new hire class had breakfast with Herb. I asked him at that time "will Southwest ever grow through merger". He said no, "because of the Culture issue". Obviously, he isn't the one making the decisions around here. I guess what I am getting at is that for 40 years SWA has prided itself on its culture and employee relations. They are fully aware of the disatrous effect a merger can have on culture. I can only believe that SWA's first priority is their employees. I think if they see this is going south, they will not allow a AW/US situation to occur, that would be too costly. What will they do? I don't know. But I do know Gary and Herb are as smart as the come when it comes to running an airline. I am sure they have a wild card! Only time will tell.

 

[Sy-bill]

What will they do?

They still have a choice to not buy the airline if they discover how the real attitudes will play out. There is a line where they can see the culture hit isn't worth the acquisition.

Everything I read is Herb still being a major influence on important decisions.

 

[The Prussian]

But in the end, it won't matter, and the aribitrator(s) will do what he/she/they want to do, and what that will be is to go with precedent.

Nu

Precedent...Schmecedent...

Who's to say that precedent is sacrosanct and can't change...and thus the direction of legal opinions, once the results play themselves out? Can not arbitrators re-formulate their opinions when they witness a AAA/AWA SLI disaster?? I think that precedent is only good up until that last case, and that legal opinion can change with the times...IMHO.

Anybody here have some legal background on "precedent"???

 

[27 driver]

Which is exactly what the USAPA folks said they would do and than reneged when they didn't like result. They have given up a lot of money and opportunity for that little faux pau.

I can only speak for myself so I will accept what the arbitrator decides. I am sure it will be "fair and equitable". I think the biggest difference here is that we are not both ALPA. I am not sure that if we don't like the decision and decide to de-certify ALPA it will make a difference. I guess that will be for the lawyers to decide.

 

[27 driver]

They still have a choice to not buy the airline if they discover how the real attitudes will play out. There is a line where they can see the culture hit isn't worth the acquisition.

Everything I read is Herb still being a major influence on important decisions.

The only flaw I see with you theory is that the DOCC will probably happen long before any SLI gets nasty. Besides you are assuming that it will turn into an East/West scenario. It could go smoothly just like DAL/NWA. Keep the faith until given reason not to. I can assure you any SLI decisions will not be made here on Flightinfo.com.

 

[Sy-bill]

I can assure you any SLI decisions will not be made here on Flightinfo.com.

These SWA people are very smart. I am certain they are weighing in on the reactions of both the SWA employees as well as the AT employees. I find it more likely than not that this acquisition will go through mainly because I believe that the large majority of Airtran employees love this opportunity and will do what is best for this transaction to go smoothly.

This forum is not for negotiations but for an open, honest discussion of viewpoints that I would not be surprised is being monitored by both companies. Along with many other sources on the web.

I think it would to safe to think that if the leaders of SWA thought their core culture would be greatly affected by this transaction they would carefully consider the implications and make responsible decisions based on these discoveries.

 

[Midge]

Some Dope in a an RJ posts that and you believe him? Are you that gulibble.
I hope not.

M

Easy big guy. No I'm not that gullible, but I did stay at a holiday inn express last night.:laugh:
Besides, it was said by several posters. But then again, this is FI.

 

[Cruncher]

I hear often that the DAL/NWA was a smooth SLI, as it was more or less quite. However, talking to my buds there, they were not happy and still are not. Actually getting a little worse. Pay protections going away in a few months? Getting displaced from ATL to NY, bumped off ER to the MD, ....

 

[27 driver]

I hear often that the DAL/NWA was a smooth SLI, as it was more or less quite. However, talking to my buds there, they were not happy and still are not. Actually getting a little worse. Pay protections going away in a few months? Getting displaced from ATL to NY, bumped off ER to the MD, ....

That's normal with any merger/acquisition. Fences will eventually come down and there will be some seat and or domicile displacements. There will always be some that are unhappy or feel screwed. That deal did go smoothly when considering most other SLI deals. There is no perfect SLI situation. Never has been and probably never will be.

 

[Angus]

I hear often that the DAL/NWA was a smooth SLI, as it was more or less quite. However, talking to my buds there, they were not happy and still are not. Actually getting a little worse. Pay protections going away in a few months? Getting displaced from ATL to NY, bumped off ER to the MD, ....

This makes no sense to me in the general meaning and purpose of a SLI "fence".

Generally, a "fence" prohibits people from one former employee list from bidding or displacing to specific equipment or specific domicile of another former employee list and vice versa. After the "fence" expires then open bidding to a "vacancy" is allowed.

What you are implying is that after the DAL/NW "fence" expires... there will be a general system bid and all the equipment and bases go out for an overall bid and people can get displaced?

Again, I would think that after the "fence" comes down, Pilots could only bid a vacancy and NOT displace someone.... UNLESS there was a reduction notice. Maybe the DAL/NW vacancy awards are differnet.

 

[jackpearce]

This is the way it will go down, No R.S
Straight forward, Training, Aircraft, Pleasure, Leisure time, Excitement.

Enjoy your time on the bottom!

 

[CA1900]

There is no Valujet. Valujet does not exist.

Sure it does. After its crash in the Everglades, ValuJet bought out a little Orlando-based 737 operator and took its name. AirTran is the company that doesn't exist anymore.

 

[PCL_128]

There is a snapshot taken at the time of the announcement so that contracts are not changed to dilute issues like pay differences.

A snapshot is taken of the seniority lists, not of the contracts.

And I can assume that if Swapa does not like where the negotiations are going, they can stretch this out for years and years to their benefit. They must agree on arbitration.

No, they don't have to agree on arbitration. Arbitration is required by law if the parties can't come to an agreement on SLI within a relatively short timeline. Neither party can hold it up if they don't like the other party's bargaining positions.

Precedent...Schmecedent...

Who's to say that precedent is sacrosanct and can't change...and thus the direction of legal opinions, once the results play themselves out? Can not arbitrators re-formulate their opinions when they witness a AAA/AWA SLI disaster?? I think that precedent is only good up until that last case, and that legal opinion can change with the times...IMHO.

Anybody here have some legal background on "precedent"???

Arbitrators are under no legal obligation to adhere to past precedent. However, they generally do so, because it makes it easier on all arbitrators to render decisions. If a case has already been decided a certain way, the arbitrator can cite that case in his decision on a new similar case, claim that precedent has already been set, and then he doesn't have to be the bad guy who came in with his own decision out of the blue. It's basically a system of arbitrators covering each other's backs. It's a relatively small community, and they pretty much all operate in a similar manner.

 

[JohnQ]

I hear often that the DAL/NWA was a smooth SLI, as it was more or less quite. However, talking to my buds there, they were not happy and still are not. Actually getting a little worse. Pay protections going away in a few months? Getting displaced from ATL to NY, bumped off ER to the MD, ....

Given the nature of pilot personalities, this is one of the smoothest mergers and SLIs ever. It will never be perfectly smooth and without angst, because that is just the nature of pilots and this industry.

All those other things (displacements, etc) might have happened without any merger. The bottom line is that in our case "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is a very true statement. DAL brought a lot of things that NWA didn't have to the merger, and NWA brought a lot of great things that DAL didn't have (and wouldn't ever have, specifically Asia). The combination of both airlines' assets has been a very profitable one. I hope it continues for many years to come.

 

[doh]

In a roundabout way, arbitrators do take earnings into account. NWA/Republic had a ruling that allowed NWA pilots to upgrade ahead of Republic pilots on wide bodies. USAirways pilots got the wide body slots. The wage implications were not lost on the arbitrators in either case. Since there is no difference in equipment in this case, SWAPA has to make the case for the pay disparity. If the arbitrator buys off on the snapshot being not just of seniority but also pay, then the recent contract will not be of help to the AT. It might be a new precedent, or just an admission that arbitrators have always considered earnings in some form. I wouldn't rule it out in this case, but it is not a slam dunk either. It depends on who makes the more compelling argument. Rumor has it that some senior AT pilots have been saying they should get relative percentage seniority. Good luck with that one!:laugh: