Will SWA and AT truly merge?

[ivauir]

Why you laughing that is what you guys tried didn't work then won't work now.

Max,

Perhaps it would serve you to look at the situation from another perspective.

It wasn't SWA who "tried something" with F9.

It was FAPA who tried something with SWA.

They tried to multiply their windfall by an order of magnitude. They attempted to transfer their seniority to a carrier with vastly superior pay, work rules and career expectations. That isn't a realistic expectation. The result of being unreasoanable is that F9 pilots missed out on great opportunity.

 

[PapaWoody]

Please explain how pay played a role in the construction of the DAL/NWA list or the AWA/US list.

From the arbitrated decision of DAL/NWA -

"20 It is also appropriate to consider gains that flow from the merger. While it is true that both pilot forces are compensated relatively well, by comparison with the average U.S. airline, it is also the case that, on a
stand-alone basis, Northwest Pilots were paid less than their counterparts at Delta. Due to the success of the parties in bargaining a new Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (“JCBA”) effective October 30,
2008, (October 30, 2008, is the date of corporate closing of the merger.) Northwest Pilots enjoyed immediate benefits averaging 9.51% across the group. Delta characterizes this as equivalent to the value of one to two-and-one-half upgrades, depending on the equipment type, for each pre-merger pilot. (See DX-21 at 11-13; DX-37 at 2; Tr., 2549-55.)"

But wait, there's more. From the arbitrated decision in the AWA/USA dispatchers, in accordance with Allegheny-Mohawk -

" Most meaningful are the gains realized by West Dispatchers when operating under the US Airways labor agreement. It is, by most measures, the more generous document of the two. According to the record, AWA Dispatchers, prior to the merger, were the lowest paid among major carriers and worked the greatest number of annual hours.23 Following implementation of a transition agreement, work hours for AWA Dispatchers will be cut by 133 hours per year. Work days will be reduced from 10 to 8 hours.24 The East contract includes a profit sharing plan in addition to the 401(K) profit sharing; the West agreement has none. Wage rates under the U.S. Airways cba are more generous;AWA Dispatchers will reach top of scale in eleven years instead of fifteen and will enjoy wage gains ranging from 16% to 52%. 25 On the average, AWA Dispatchers will gain a 36% salary increase.
26 The West claim that similar gains might have been realized in renegotiating the AWA contract is speculative and ultimately unconvincing.
Finally, one must consider, in terms of fairness and equity, the resulting shape and impact of the merged seniority list. The equities, in this regard, favor the East group. As indicated earlier, the U.S. Airways Dispatchers are considerably more senior then their West counterparts. The arithmetic placement proposed by Local 542 would devitalize the existing Airways seniority list by granting substantial, and in some cases monumental seniority leaps that cannot be justified by the record in this case. For example, senior-most AWA Dispatcher Brenda Cozzen has an A.D. (occupational) date of January 1985. By the West proposal, she would be slotted directly above an East employee with almost six years greater seniority. This pattern is repeated down through position #81, where Dispatcher Lopez would gain more than ten years’ advantage over his counterpart, and so it continues through to the end of the list, with West employees receiving twelve, thirteen and fourteen year advantages. 28 As the East notes, 29 the junior-most West employee did not begin work as an AWA Dispatcher until November of 2005, after both execution and approval of the merger agreement.
In summary, based on these findings, the conclusion is that fairness and equity in this case militates strongly toward a date of hire list. On the one hand, this outcome may consign certain West employees to furlough and will, of course, make them more vulnerable, based on their relative seniority, to later displacements. But that is, after all, the essence of length-of-tenure based seniority, which, in this particular case, heavily favors the older U.S. Airways work force."

As I have always said, the totality of the situation will be considered, including the pre-acquisition pay and benefits and the subsequent 35% - 90% compensation increases for the AAI pilots.

Fraternally,
PapaWoody

 

[SWA/FO]

Why you laughing that is what you guys tried didn't work then won't work now. Relative seniority is fair. AT guys give up there upgrade and you win additional growth with our opportunities.

I'm laughing because, F9 cried like little Pu$$ies about our desire to staple their bankrupt a$$es to the bottom of our list. Flash forward, they (the F9 dudes) try the same thing months later to the Republic dudes. What is that Pot meet Kettle?

I don't think, I want you on my list if you are that dumb and can't figure this out.

By-the-way, you AT guys would be after the same thing (staple) if the shoe was on the other foot. Of course we would tell you about all you get from aquiring us and it would sound similar to BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH, which is what I hear from Tranny, everyday.

 

[Ty Webb]

I'm laughing because, F9 cried like little Pu$$ies about our desire to staple their bankrupt a$$es to the bottom of our list. Flash forward, they (the F9 dudes) try the same thing months later to the Republic dudes. What is that Pot meet Kettle?

I don't think, I want you on my list if you are that dumb and can't figure this out.

By-the-way, you AT guys would be after the same thing (staple) if the shoe was on the other foot. Of course we would tell you about all you get from aquiring us and it would sound similar to BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH, which is what I hear from Tranny, everyday.

Whiskey for breakfast, huh?

 

[dicko]

From the arbitrated decision of DAL/NWA -

"20 It is also appropriate to consider gains that flow from the merger. While it is true that both pilot forces are compensated relatively well, by comparison with the average U.S. airline, it is also the case that, on a
stand-alone basis, Northwest Pilots were paid less than their counterparts at Delta. Due to the success of the parties in bargaining a new Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (“JCBA”) effective October 30,
2008, (October 30, 2008, is the date of corporate closing of the merger.) Northwest Pilots enjoyed immediate benefits averaging 9.51% across the group. Delta characterizes this as equivalent to the value of one to two-and-one-half upgrades, depending on the equipment type, for each pre-merger pilot. (See DX-21 at 11-13; DX-37 at 2; Tr., 2549-55.)"



Fraternally,
PapaWoody

You're a sneaky one aren't you Papa.

Regarding the NWA/DAL Decision. You didn't quote the actual arbitrators decision and his reasoning ..... Did you Papa ? It tells a different story. What you quoted was a small chunk of the DAL argument.

Why don't you post the decision and the Arbitrators reasoning ?

Nice Try :laugh:

 

[PapaWoody]

You're a sneaky one aren't you Papa.

Regarding the NWA/DAL Decision. You didn't quote the actual arbitrators decision and his reasoning ..... Did you Papa ? It tells a different story. What you quoted was a small chunk of the DAL argument.

Why don't you post the decision and the Arbitrators reasoning ?

Nice Try :laugh:

I didn't quote the whole decision because that wasn't the point. Yes, DAL/NWA was basically a relative seniority award. However, the arbitrators came to that decision after weighing all the factors and determining that was appropriate, in that instance. One of the factors that they considered was the pay gains realized by the NWA pilots (which part of "appropriate to consider" do you not understand?), which contributed to DAL getting the longer end of the stick. My point, and I realized that it would be lost on you dicko, was that the AAI mantras of the "law requires relative seniority" and "pay differences don't matter" are invalid arguments and none of the recent arbitration decisions bears them out. If using logic is sneaky, then guilty. But maybe it's just over your head.

PW

PS I notice you didn't bother referencing the AWA/USA dispatchers award, which was an arbitration decision between two seniority groups that directly referenced Allegheny/Mohawk, not ALPA merger policy. But then I didn't actually expect you to give credence to anything that contradicts your specious arguments. /shrug

 

[dicko]

I didn't quote the whole decision because that wasn't the point. Yes, DAL/NWA was basically a relative seniority award. However, the arbitrators came to that decision after weighing all the factors and determining that was appropriate, in that instance. One of the factors that they considered was the pay gains realized by the NWA pilots (which part of "appropriate to consider" do you not understand?), which contributed to DAL getting the longer end of the stick. My point, and I realized that it would be lost on you dicko, was that the AAI mantras of the "law requires relative seniority" and "pay differences don't matter" are invalid arguments and none of the recent arbitration decisions bears them out. If using logic is sneaky, then guilty. But maybe it's just over your head.

PW

PS I notice you didn't bother referencing the AWA/USA dispatchers award, which was an arbitration decision between two seniority groups that directly referenced Allegheny/Mohawk, not ALPA merger policy. But then I didn't actually expect you to give credence to anything that contradicts your specious arguments. /shrug

Wood,

You quoted DAL's argument. The arbitrator considered the pay issue and largely ignored it. How did the pay issue affect the decision Papa ? Hmmmmm ? Post it hear so we can read it.

The dispatcher decision is not relevant. It was ignored.

Nobody is going to take your upgrade from you. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

[ivauir]

I really hope the teams are more reasonable than this outrageous flamebaiting or AWA/USAir here we come ... even worse ... SWA/Muse.

 

[FlyinGuy]

I will let out a little secret......AT pilots will keep their seats.



SWAPA and SWA have agreed to purchase new seats for all the AT airplanes. The old seats will be distributed to the AT pilots along with a stapler!


Remember, none of us knows how this will play out. Some of you need to relax and enjoy your Saturday.....because it might be one the last weekends that the Trannies enjoy at home for a while!!!! Just kidding....relax.

 

[OK3]

I noticed no one responded to why relative seniority wasn't specified in the B/M legislation. I am not surprised because we all know that relative is one way to combine lists but certainly not mandated by federal law as some of you falsely claim.

It is ludicrous to think that pay and work rules are not considered when combining lists. If they were not how do you think there could be any other solution than relative? The authors of the legislation realized that each case is unique and that all relevant factors should be looked at, which is why they did not specify that any particular formula be used. They did not just "forget" to add that in to the legislation.

To the SWA haters: You are putting words in our mouth when you claim we are expecting or asking for a straight staple. I have not heard that from anyone who actually works for us. F9 was unique and never really had a chance to have any meaningful discussion as to how to combine lists. Due to the timeline of that discussion there was only one way we could have come to an agreement; if a staple was agreed to. Our union is not empowered to agree to anything else without a vote, which we did not have time to do.

To the AAI guys: I don't blame you for trying for everything you can get. The only reason I post here is to try and inject some reason in to the discussion. SWA is a 10 billion dollar company that is buying a 1 billion dollar company (Fridays market cap). They are not equals. Some of you guys claim that what our company brings to the table is not relevant, then go on to say how your company brings Atlanta. If what our companies bring is not relevant, then the contracts we bring are, and ours is vastly superior. Either way an arbitrator looks at it, we bring better careers to the transaction. Again "windfall" can't just refer to seniority percentage. If it did there would be no reason to have an arbitrator decide anything, it would be a formula to be used in every case. I hope when this is over we can shake hands and have fun flying together for long and prosperous careers.