YangGang2020

MGMT could charge bag fees, since fares are on the floor, to help keep people on staff. Is that off the table?

saab2000

My guess is that’s off the table. Customers really love this even though bag fees are just part of the fare. When people find out I work for SWA it’s one of the things they rave about loving. SWA customers are pretty loyal and this is one thing they are loyal for I think.

People aren’t really getting anything for free. It’s just rolled up into the fare. Charge bag fees and pretty soon that’s one more thing that differentiates the product from the competitors that’s gone. Personally, I feel changing this would be a mistake but I’ll leave that to others who get paid to make those decisions.

pangolin

I think it should not be forgotten that this announcement comes on the heels of more stimulus talks.

4V14T0R

I'm aware, and I don't like being used as a pawn. I won't forget it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lewbronski

Makes it kinda worse - like sociopathic.

RJSAviator76

Sorry, but you're wrong. You have laundry lists of pilots bidding on everything under the sun and historically have been. It was premium, now it's straight. That's actually why reserve has been more and more popular and why you see more and more senior people bidding reserve in both seats and then picking up around it if you want more, or credit a nice amount and stay away from the place.

GK has already sued the maintainers because of perception of them not picking up OT on weekends among other things, and as for war with the employee groups, remember this?

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/...pilots-as.html

After 2016, they SHOULD have been in damage control mode... and then they brought CK onboard to deal with pilots, and let the grievances piled up to 150+. Making an argument of the meaning of "etc." to define IROPS? Does this sound like a company in a damage control mode or the one that actually cares? And then Gary answers very clearly where his priorities lie, and that's with the shareholders, and absolutely not with employees. The quote has been posted earlier in the thread...

The company speaks a good line, just like the abusive husband who beats the ever living crap out of his wife, but brings her flowers and keeps reminding her how much he really loves her while giving her fresh new bruises. But hey... FAMILY, right?

acecrackshot

I’d say you’ve got little experience with the federal judiciary. They can and will do what they want or are told to do.

Profane Kahuna

Explain to me how exactly in your “experience with the federal judiciary” they force a pilot to work on their day off?

Do they send a SWAT team to the house and zip tie them? Drive them to airport and hold a gun to their head?

Jeff Lebowski

Only at Emirates.

Lewbronski

I’m pretty sure any action taken would be against the union and its officers. That could result in crippling fines or damage awards. It can also harm the union’s bargaining position in negotiations.

I don’t know that there’s a cause of action under the RLA for the company to sue an individual pilot represented by the union for participating in a concerted effort to change the status quo.

I doubt it’d be successful but there might be a private, civil cause of action available to act against individual pilots if their actions could be proven to have harmed the union or a class of individuals within the union. The bottom line is they’re not likely to come after any one individual unless you’re a union leader. But your individual actions like not picking up open time like you used to or calling in sick more often might end up hurting everyone within the union.