Why are the 1700+ trannies pilots not recalling their status reps?

[Sacha]

Really? Really?

Get over yourself. You're a third world entry level jet gear jerker. Period.

Really? Really? When did Alaska get 777's?

Get over yourself. You're a third world entry level jet gear jerker who makes 40% less for doing the exact same job I do. Nutjob.

 

[scoreboardII]

Let me explain to you the way you learnt in your "previous life"...I

Put in simple words, your yapping on this forum trying to scare our guys and swing the upcoming vote, is why so many of us lobbied the MEC to vote this down.

You funny, using Canadian words like learnt.

Put in simple words for you to understand, it is the weak of mind who fear the vote of the masses and resort to mob rule.

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

You're a third world entry level jet gear jerker who makes 40% less for doing the exact same job I do.

Yes, yes you are 40% better person than the rest of us. Just the point we were trying to make to you. You give SWA pilots a bad name, sir! YOU need to be re-cultured.

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

You funny, using Canadian words like learnt.

My phone spells and auto-fills, I'm just hitting buttons and walking. I communicated, you got the message. We're not writing a collage paper here.

 

[Captain Jeff]

The problem was not just a reduced relative seniority number. The other documents that were probably just "ALPA" only had all kinds of restrictions in them that were all bad. The whole Atlanta fence thing was kinda wierd. The only one that it would benifit was a senior guy that lived in atlanta. Other that than, junior people that live in atlanta would have to commute out and senior people would commute in. So that is just bad for everyone. Something like 70% of airtran commutes so not many people live there. No one is saying "no thank you" to SouthWest or SWAPA. It is just that this deal was too convoluted with restrictions and things that were supposed to be protections, but really worked against you. We are just hoping that the next thing the unions come up with is just a simple fair agreement.

 

[Ty Webb]

The problem was not just a reduced relative seniority number. The other documents that were probably just "ALPA" only had all kinds of restrictions in them that were all bad. The whole Atlanta fence thing was kinda wierd. The only one that it would benifit was a senior guy that lived in atlanta. Other that than, junior people that live in atlanta would have to commute out and senior people would commute in. So that is just bad for everyone. Something like 70% of airtran commutes so not many people live there. No one is saying "no thank you" to SouthWest or SWAPA. It is just that this deal was too convoluted with restrictions and things that were supposed to be protections, but really worked against you. We are just hoping that the next thing the unions come up with is just a simple fair agreement.

Yep.

We understand that ATL will be reduced irregardless, but the 60% of pilots who will be displaced wouldn't have any system-wide seniority to bid with. Pilots who were senior lineholders would have been pinned to the bottom of their rosters for the next decade.

We're not ungrateful, nor greedy. I understand that at one point, we offered to give up about 30% of our CA seats in exchange for better seniority, but that part was rejected by SWA due to training costs.

 

[DonVerita]

Ty...tried to PM you but your PM mailbox is full. Clear out some space.

 

[SkiFishFly]

Usually the Navy guys are brighter than this. Your 60% position at AAI wouldn't get you anywhere near 60% slot at SWA, don't you understand that? Your 60% spot at AAI would probably drop you to about 80% at SWA for your DOH if it was in 2006. Even Mr Lucky, your Junior Captain, would be at 68% on the Southwest list. Yet he is a Captain, sound fair? And of course Ty Webb would land at the 54% spot at SWA, not a Captain yet. Even DOH would put him at 48%, not the 29% he enjoys at AAI. There will be losses, that you can count on.

Nice try but Wrong. I did the math myself. DOH would put me at 63%. That was even sliding it by a few months - giving SWA guys a few extra months above my doh.

I didn't like the agreement because the protections were really false protections - full of holes. It also relegated our Junior CAs to ten years on reserve commuting to junior bases. I lot of them would have been forced to downgrade to maintain some sort of home life. The corresponding upgrades were all going to go to SWA FOs. It was a windfall seniority grab for SWA pilots.

I certainly hope to be a part of the SWA family someday. I wish more folks would show an appropriate level of respect for their fellow pilots.

 

[BlueBlood]

What's this I keep hearing about your MEC having to send it out with a "yes" recommendation? Where does it say that in the Process Agreement? Chapter and verse please.

Ty,

"Irregardless" is not a word. Regardless or irrespective. Take your pick. You've been spending too much time with stupid people.

 

[Lear70]

What's this I keep hearing about your MEC having to send it out with a "yes" recommendation? Where does it say that in the Process Agreement? Chapter and verse please.

It came out from the MEC at the meeting. Even the MEC members (Chairman, Sec Treas) that appeared to support the SIA had to agree that the language legally disallowed them to send it out with a "No" recommendation. The Merger Committee did not disagree, either.

From memory, the verbiage appears to read "subject to the normal governance procedures of both SWAPA and ALPA, if both unions vote to approve the agreement, it shall go to membership vote at both carriers" (loosely paraphrased). That restricted the MEC to either "approving" or "disapproving", not "approving the decision to allow a vote but recommending no".

The two attorneys present from ALPA agreed on that interpretation. There was something said briefly by LH (MEC Chair) that I didn't quite catch that we had asked SWAPA and SWA for clarification whether we COULD send it out with individual recommendations Yea/Nay from each voting representative, but received no response in the days leading up to the MEC meeting.

It's a moot point at this juncture, but just FYI that it wasn't something that was just "made up".