Will SWA and AT truly merge?

[PCL_128]

PapaW, Tweet-a-Lishus, or whatever you want to call yourself today, you might want to read that merger agreement that you didn't even know existed until I pointed you to it. I suggest that you read sections 3, 5, and 6, as well as the definition of "Effective Time" in section 1. You might learn something.

 

[GuppyWN]

Yes, I'm telling you that our contract does not allow for SWA to keep the operations separate for longer than 18 months after the date of corporate closing (assuming the TA passes, which I'm sure that it will).

So if SWA spins off 51% of Guadalupe Holdings where do you go?

Gup

 

[Cometman]

Yes, I'm telling you that our contract does not allow for SWA to keep the operations separate for longer than 18 months after the date of corporate closing (assuming the TA passes, which I'm sure that it will).

I think SWA has a 24 month limit unless they agree to extend it. So, according to you your contract would be the binding deal on how long SWA can operate 2 seperate companies.

Once the 18 months pass the deal is over? Is that correct? Even though SWAPA syas it is ok to go 24 months.

 

[PCL_128]

Seriously, you guys should really take the time to read the merger agreement. It's not that long, and it contains a lot of information that will help you guys understand how this transaction will actually work. For example, Gup, it might interest you to know that Guadalupe Holdings will not even exist after the effective date of the merger. SWA will immediately cause the merger of AirTran Holdings and Guadalupe Holdings, and AirTran will be the surviving corporation. There is a lot more information about what happens after that, as well. It's all available right in the merger agreement, which no one here has apparently read before making all kinds of declarative statements about what will and could happen. Just read the danged thing.

 

[PCL_128]

I think SWA has a 24 month limit unless they agree to extend it. So, according to you your contract would be the binding deal on how long SWA can operate 2 seperate companies.

Once the 18 months pass the deal is over? Is that correct? Even though SWAPA syas it is ok to go 24 months.

The more restrictive agreement would be binding in this case, which would be the 18 month limitation in our CBA, unless ALPA were to agree to extend that limit, which would require membership ratification.

 

[roughneck]

PCL,
Did you read the "material change" clause? I'm pretty sure Gary has options.

 

[BlueBlood]

PCL,

How long have you been in the airline business? What is your background (companies)?

Just curious.

 

[luv2fly]

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_128]

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.

 

[SWA/FO]

textbook example of a windfall

for AirTran guys = Southwest Airlines aquires AirTran.

 

[luv2fly]

PCL, please think before you type. You just agreed with what the option GH gives SWA, the ability to divest prior to any combination.

 

[BlueBlood]

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.

 

[Sy-bill]

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.

 

[BlueBlood]

He's not an LEC guy, I was told he is an MEC guy. Is one of the "Masters".)

 

[Kharma Police]

for AirTran guys = Southwest Airlines aquires AirTran.

Windfall for SWA/FO = He gets to finally upgrade