Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
11-11-2011, 08:44 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: ????????????????
Posts: 216
They already started by making the schedules stink. Now we are trying watch our schedules under the coconut. Mean while our money on the table just disappeared.
11-11-2011, 09:09 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
11-11-2011, 09:09 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
11-11-2011, 09:11 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
You have a rudimentary understanding of our contract at best. The AT purchase was NOT a violation of our contract. There is a provision to run a wholly owned subsidiary for 24 months after final closing. After that 24 month window all flying must be done by SWAPA pilots. We do not allow ANY domestic code share period.
You state that management would get rid of the scope clause in order to facilitate an acquisition on a larger scale is completely incorrect. Management cannot nullify any portion of our CBA without OUR CONSENT. Our consent will never be given. We like the way the agreement is written. It provides many disincentives for anything other than internal growth. Our section 1 also provides protections against structuring any deal where another entity would eventually be the surviving carrier after a merger.
Of course management cannot unilaterally nullify the scope provision that has served you so well... duuuuh. And of course you like the way it is written, it favors you very well. But... this merger has probably come at a cost to that sacred culture... probably. You might be right that the AT guys will be blinded by the money, and will forget over time how this went down. Then again, maybe not. I still contend that this was your silver bullet. SWA won't have the money to try this with a bigger player like AK, but if they DID, it would not be nearly as easy to trample the other group. Management won't be able to come down as heavy handed as they did here. You did well except that I still wonder what you got in return other than seniority... or is the koolaid flow THAT strong at SWA...
11-11-2011, 09:11 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
11-11-2011, 09:13 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
11-11-2011, 09:18 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: 7er
Posts: 1,673
11-11-2011, 09:33 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: SLC 767ER Captain
Posts: 602
I’ve mentioned this before, but it seems that we have been losing ground on our Scope clause for years. Every contract that came out ALPA would say, “This Scope clause is rock solid.” Then the company would find a legal way around it every time. I don’t remember all the instances, but I do remember this one. Remember when: ASA was going to get 5 737 aircraft, but instead got the 146’s instead? Since several of them were configured for 88 seats, ASA just painted a couple of them all white while they were being our connection carrier. I know it was a long time ago, but it still happened. I wonder how long it will be before ALPA allows 100 seaters since the 50 seaters didn’t survive economically. When ASA was going to get those bigger Embraer aircraft, the company said they couldn’t allow the mainline to fly them because it was too costly, even though ASA rates were $2.00 more per hour. But hey, I have to remember that Bar said that “I’ve got mine, so what do I care?” Bar I’m just giving you a bad time in fun. 
11-11-2011, 09:36 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
No one equates time and lost trips either.
11-11-2011, 09:39 AM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
The leverage to make contract improvements that you speak of would have been made at the expense of relaxed scope to allow the company to realize synergies earlier in the transaction. That was a deal that SWAPA was unwilling to make. We will not sell our scope for monetary short term gain. Scope is like a religion here. Any scope give concession will never be regained going forward.
You correctly assert that management is not in fact looking out for the pilots directly. But, management is most definitely looking out for the PRODUCT. The reason we do not outsource or codeshare is built around control of the product that is produced. Southwest wants complete and total control of the product they provide to paying customers. For these and many other reasons codeshare is not done at SWA.
You state that management would get rid of the scope clause in order to facilitate an acquisition on a larger scale is completely incorrect. Management cannot nullify any portion of our CBA without OUR CONSENT. Our consent will never be given. We like the way the agreement is written. It provides many disincentives for anything other than internal growth. Our section 1 also provides protections against structuring any deal where another entity would eventually be the surviving carrier after a merger.
SWAPA's scope provides for any flying done for Southwest Airlines, in any capacity, will only be done by SWAPA pilots on the SWAPA Master Seniority List. We do not budge on that. We will not even allow a SWA sticker on another aircraft unless it is flown by a SWAPA pilot.
You correctly assert that management is not in fact looking out for the pilots directly. But, management is most definitely looking out for the PRODUCT. The reason we do not outsource or codeshare is built around control of the product that is produced. Southwest wants complete and total control of the product they provide to paying customers. For these and many other reasons codeshare is not done at SWA.
You state that management would get rid of the scope clause in order to facilitate an acquisition on a larger scale is completely incorrect. Management cannot nullify any portion of our CBA without OUR CONSENT. Our consent will never be given. We like the way the agreement is written. It provides many disincentives for anything other than internal growth. Our section 1 also provides protections against structuring any deal where another entity would eventually be the surviving carrier after a merger.
SWAPA's scope provides for any flying done for Southwest Airlines, in any capacity, will only be done by SWAPA pilots on the SWAPA Master Seniority List. We do not budge on that. We will not even allow a SWA sticker on another aircraft unless it is flown by a SWAPA pilot.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
