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

Will SWA and AT truly merge?

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
PCL you are making the assumption that GK will actually combine the two carriers. Without the combining your assumption don't matter, you will be a single carrier, just like now. You will just have a different owner.

By the way, are you LEC? Your birthday on your profile matches one of the guys on the LEC.
 
PCL,
Did you read the "material change" clause? I'm pretty sure Gary has options.

Take a look at it again. Negotiations under the RLA are exempt, as carriers are required under the RLA to bargain in good faith. The merger agreement cannot cause the carrier to be in violation of the law, so the merger agreement excludes RLA bargaining from the material adverse change clause.

PCL you are making the assumption that GK will actually combine the two carriers.

No, it's not an assumption, it's a contractual requirement. He has 18 months to either combine the carriers or divest AirTran. It's not a choice.

By the way, are you LEC? Your birthday on your profile matches one of the guys on the LEC.

No, I'm not.
 
PCL, please think before you type. You just agreed with what the option GH gives SWA, the ability to divest prior to any combination.
 
One thing that I wonder is the "all about culture" airline is taking on a different breed of pilots. In no way am I suggesting that AT is a bad bunch, I just find it hard to believe that Mr. Kelly hasn't considered the implications of disgruntled pilots sharing the same cockpit and how that could "materially change" his operation. From my outside looking in view, that's the real "material change" argument.

So.....you are a SWA guy and an AT shows up to the aircraft to sit in the left seat when he is a couple of years junior, or more, by date of hire. That's what I call a party! Dude gets a hefty increase in pay, far better QOL, a more secure future, benevolent management, and keeps his seat. Sign me up for some of that!

I honestly hope you guys can work this thing out as I know many from both groups and would hate to see the ole Republic/NWA/Southern thing raise its ugly head.

No offense to the AT guys, but if I were SWA, I would be looking for any possible "get out of jail free" card in case things go south in a hurry.

Godspeed.
 
you might want to read that merger agreement

Well I have. And much more other than that.

A merger agreement document does not mean they will consolidate the two companies. If you read both Airtran and Southwest Chairs speak they say over and over acquisition/integration. I can't find where either of them have used the word "merger". There is nothing, absolutely nothing that requires SWA to consolidate the two companies. They can be operated separately....indefinitely. Just like American and American eagle.

Now there would be a violation of Swapa's scope agreement. But don't think for a minute that if the pilots believe there is a lack of fairness or good faith that they will easily negotiate exceptions that would pertain to these specific seniority issues with the pilots of AT.

Where is stated that an acquiring company is not allowed to slowly dismantle what they purchased. There is a very long history of many companies doing just that. And in the airline business, remember a company named Eastern Airlines?

This agreement is all about acquisition agreement and not about a merger agreement. No matter what the document is titled. In a merger agreement leadership is established. No such talk in this ACQUISITION. Southwest has all the power.

Much of this will unfold as time goes on. Based on the attitudes on this board, which probably accurately reflects a sample of both work groups, it sounds like 2012 could be an interesting year for both SWA and AT.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top