1,221 Reasons Not to work for Southwest
10-03-2023, 04:19 AM
#1371
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,651
I'm not following the argument here. Why is saving the company money in overhead and infrastructure a bad thing if the pilots end up benefitting too? Just using Dallas as an example again: there's no way to make DFW a feasible stand alone base with only 100 or so lines. And even if they did there's still no guarantee it wouldn't dilute the lines in DAL or otherwise have a negative impact on the pilots there. So to argue they should just make it a base if they want to fly there doesn't seem to hold water. And I'm still trying to figure out how this could in any way be sold to us as potential "explosive growth". Just from what we know right now with none of the details ironed out it's minimal growth at best, but a way to potentially increase flexibility and open new markets.
I know I sound like a broken record, but I implore everybody to learn from history. SWAPA has been down this road before with the company. It results in sadness and regret for us. Every. Single. Time.
10-03-2023, 07:05 AM
#1373
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 988
I'm not following the argument here. Why is saving the company money in overhead and infrastructure a bad thing if the pilots end up benefitting too? Just using Dallas as an example again: there's no way to make DFW a feasible stand alone base with only 100 or so lines. And even if they did there's still no guarantee it wouldn't dilute the lines in DAL or otherwise have a negative impact on the pilots there. So to argue they should just make it a base if they want to fly there doesn't seem to hold water. And I'm still trying to figure out how this could in any way be sold to us as potential "explosive growth". Just from what we know right now with none of the details ironed out it's minimal growth at best, but a way to potentially increase flexibility and open new markets.
Let’s apply a two contract vision to this language: what happens when we aren’t negotiating from a position of economic leverage? All of the sudden SWA pilots are covering BWI/DCA/IAD, LGB/LAX/ONT/SNA, TPA/FLL/MIA/MCO, IAH/HOU, MDW/ORD, DAL/DFW/TKI or they can take a paycut. There’s plenty of room for the camel once it gets its nose inside the tent flap.
We are granting relief on current contractual language that puts money in our pockets for 0 block hours for a promise of growth. This company is free to open domiciles as they see fit, they just don’t want to deal with the contractual requirements to do it. They could also originate lines wherever they’d like with double deadheads on both ends, but they don’t want to do that either.
“Granting relief to language has never come back to bite us in the @ss,” he said sarcastically. ELITT, DTC, Premium sick accrual, flying the 800 for 700 rates…those were all givebacks that cost this pilot group money and quality of life.
“Co-terminals” are more of the same. N00bs in both seats are going to take it in the shorts on this. I know I will delay my upgrade if it means I have to cover two airports if the language is as crappy as it already looks. That’s costing me money. It’s the definition of a confession that affects our pay and quality of life.
Why wait for it to be in an AIP when if enough people think like I do now, we can nip this in the bud and avoid having to shoot down TA1 over this?
10-03-2023, 08:17 AM
#1375
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,153
I can’t believe all the arguments I’m seeing stating “the company needs this to expand”. Really? Because that’s what contract negotiations are about: helping the company. I know that’s what I was thinking when I walked the picket line. It worked out great for us with the 800 right? I have news for you: the company will expand regardless. We are already flying out of IAH and ORD. I promise you they will operate out of DFW as well, with or without co-terminals. What the company really wants is to expand with reduced costs. Costs that come directly out of the pilot group’s pockets.
I see a lot of talk about “guardrails” and protections (and very little talk about compelling benefits). These guardrails all start with qualifiers like “probably”.
You will “probably” be able to self assign on reserve to avoid a co-terminal. You understand that those of us living in base on reserve are trying not to get used right? Self assigning sort of defeats the purpose. Covering multiple bases on reserve will not be fun. Remember how that’s been the standard counter to the junior upgrade at other airlines topic? “Yeah sure they make captain quick, but they have to cover multiple airports and that’s terrible”. The three cities proposed here may not be NYC, but that doesn’t mean they won’t be a nightmare to get around.
You will “probably” avoid a co-terminal line because others will bid them. Yeah… ok. Again no guarantees, and if those lines suck they will absolutely go junior. No avoiding it.
Everyone keeps cautioning the nay sayers to wait for the final language. There may be some truth to that, and I’ll try to remain open minded until that happens, but this looks like a major concession so far. Nothing in the bullet points that SWAPA sent out counter that. I’m thinking if there were anything more positive to release about this they would have done so. Time will tell but it feels like TA1 just got torpedoed.
I see a lot of talk about “guardrails” and protections (and very little talk about compelling benefits). These guardrails all start with qualifiers like “probably”.
You will “probably” be able to self assign on reserve to avoid a co-terminal. You understand that those of us living in base on reserve are trying not to get used right? Self assigning sort of defeats the purpose. Covering multiple bases on reserve will not be fun. Remember how that’s been the standard counter to the junior upgrade at other airlines topic? “Yeah sure they make captain quick, but they have to cover multiple airports and that’s terrible”. The three cities proposed here may not be NYC, but that doesn’t mean they won’t be a nightmare to get around.
You will “probably” avoid a co-terminal line because others will bid them. Yeah… ok. Again no guarantees, and if those lines suck they will absolutely go junior. No avoiding it.
Everyone keeps cautioning the nay sayers to wait for the final language. There may be some truth to that, and I’ll try to remain open minded until that happens, but this looks like a major concession so far. Nothing in the bullet points that SWAPA sent out counter that. I’m thinking if there were anything more positive to release about this they would have done so. Time will tell but it feels like TA1 just got torpedoed.
.
10-03-2023, 09:27 AM
#1376
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
The rest of it is paid in drives across town, days missed at home, and other QOL items.
It's death by a thousand cuts that ends up costing us to save them money.
It is the definition of a concession, which is exactly what I have been pounding the pavement and holding a sign to prevent.
1) More pairings coming to a base with co-terminal if the company is successful in pursuing more gates and flying out of co-terminals; if they are successful, then it means more movement and more choices for people in that base. If they are successful, then that also means more (and better) commute options because we aren't limiting ourselves to airports only served by us. As I've shown to you, DAL isn't even a choice for you as an OKC commuter unless you want to drive. With DFW as co-terminal, you just gained 8 flights to start your trip. You may not see that as a plus. A guy/gal next door to you might.
2) It would be ridiculously stupid to have two separate bases in the same city and the example of that would be limiting and separating ELITT for two airports 10-15 miles apart; out-of-base priority for OT bidding at an airport in the same city. That would be just downright stupid.
3) Screaming this is a concession is akin to varsity players screaming we're all taking concessions and major pay cuts because they've grown accustomed to 200 TFP because premium was flowing. Is it a concession/paycut for those who only fly their line? Is it a concession/paycut for those who occasionally pick up someone else's trip in TTGA? Is it a concession/paycut for those who take their vacation and use it as earned paid time off vs. padding their paycheck? A little too loose with screaming concession there, T. Just because you may not like it does't make it a concession...
Second, these titans of industry have been putting their hand in my family's pocket for the last 3 years while they have enjoyed raises and bonuses. During Christmas time, they asked us all to take pay cuts, give away our contractual rights, and then threatened to fire 1,221 of my brothers and sisters. Last year I got crushed over the holiday season due to their inept management and then they still managed to steal half of my profit sharing to help pay for it. Pardon me if I a not in a giving mood right now.
I know I sound like a broken record, but I implore everybody to learn from history. SWAPA has been down this road before with the company. It results in sadness and regret for us. Every. Single. Time.
Now... this doesn't mean a blanket approval, but rather draft language that benefits us and protects us against them abusing it and hold any further expansion of the co-terminal language hostage based on how the roll-out here plays out. Again, EVERY OTHER MAJOR AIRLINE PILOT GROUP HAS THIS LANGUAGE. THIS IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT.
It's a concept.... not a concession. And just like the separate hotels issue, it certainly isn't the hill to die on one way or another, especially considering what SWAPA's mandate for C2020 is.
10-03-2023, 09:39 AM
#1377
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
Let’s apply a two contract vision to this language: what happens when we aren’t negotiating from a position of economic leverage? All of the sudden SWA pilots are covering BWI/DCA/IAD, LGB/LAX/ONT/SNA, TPA/FLL/MIA/MCO, IAH/HOU, MDW/ORD, DAL/DFW/TKI or they can take a paycut. There’s plenty of room for the camel once it gets its nose inside the tent flap.
We are granting relief on current contractual language that puts money in our pockets for 0 block hours for a promise of growth. This company is free to open domiciles as they see fit, they just don’t want to deal with the contractual requirements to do it. They could also originate lines wherever they’d like with double deadheads on both ends, but they don’t want to do that either.
“Granting relief to language has never come back to bite us in the @ss,” he said sarcastically. ELITT, DTC, Premium sick accrual, flying the 800 for 700 rates…those were all givebacks that cost this pilot group money and quality of life.
“Co-terminals” are more of the same. N00bs in both seats are going to take it in the shorts on this. I know I will delay my upgrade if it means I have to cover two airports if the language is as crappy as it already looks. That’s costing me money. It’s the definition of a confession that affects our pay and quality of life.
Why wait for it to be in an AIP when if enough people think like I do now, we can nip this in the bud and avoid having to shoot down TA1 over this?
“Co-terminals” are more of the same. N00bs in both seats are going to take it in the shorts on this. I know I will delay my upgrade if it means I have to cover two airports if the language is as crappy as it already looks. That’s costing me money. It’s the definition of a confession that affects our pay and quality of life.
Why wait for it to be in an AIP when if enough people think like I do now, we can nip this in the bud and avoid having to shoot down TA1 over this?
10-03-2023, 10:42 AM
#1378
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,030
SWA was expanding quickly during covid and had to slow down BECAUSE OF STAFFING, not because of domiciles, and staffing is not getting fixed because our contract sucks.
The line that we can expand quickly if we have co-domiciles is BS, and even if it’s true (which it’s not) shows we’re like a bunch of juvenile RJ pilots that gave concessions for SJS and the promise of growth that never came.
It’s the most junior league trick in the book and people here are falling for it.
The line that we can expand quickly if we have co-domiciles is BS, and even if it’s true (which it’s not) shows we’re like a bunch of juvenile RJ pilots that gave concessions for SJS and the promise of growth that never came.
It’s the most junior league trick in the book and people here are falling for it.
10-03-2023, 10:42 AM
#1379
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 641
Only if SWAPA allows it... the company tried it. SWAPA rejected it. If it's abusive and doesn't work for us, why would we allow to expand it blindly without improving it?
If you actively play the game, then you know your first sentence is false because DH's to/from already established domiciles are how I made a ton of money already. Think our Scheduling will get smart? If you do, you have way more faith in them than you probably should. I've explained the new domicile issue in a separate post and explained how opening a cross-town separate domicile would actually HURT the pilot group, but the short of it was if you're say in DAL and the company opened DFW as a separate domicile, you just got hosed out of ELITT and OT bidding with in-base seniority at airports where one may take you 10-20 minutes more or less to drive to. Worth it? Not for me.
So the question to you as well is do you think we should be like Carl Kuwitzky and anything the company suggests or asks for should be an automatic no because we figure if they're asking for it, it's gotta be some kind of screwing for the pilot group? Or do you think we should explore it, make them a counteroffer with the language that benefits us as well?
If you actively play the game, then you know your first sentence is false because DH's to/from already established domiciles are how I made a ton of money already. Think our Scheduling will get smart? If you do, you have way more faith in them than you probably should. I've explained the new domicile issue in a separate post and explained how opening a cross-town separate domicile would actually HURT the pilot group, but the short of it was if you're say in DAL and the company opened DFW as a separate domicile, you just got hosed out of ELITT and OT bidding with in-base seniority at airports where one may take you 10-20 minutes more or less to drive to. Worth it? Not for me.
So the question to you as well is do you think we should be like Carl Kuwitzky and anything the company suggests or asks for should be an automatic no because we figure if they're asking for it, it's gotta be some kind of screwing for the pilot group? Or do you think we should explore it, make them a counteroffer with the language that benefits us as well?
10-03-2023, 10:51 AM
#1380
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
Now, what DOES sway how I vote and issues that would singularly be an automatic NO vote for me are:
Benefits (STD/LTD) not industry leading.
Pay rates not being greater than 757/767 rates at competitors.
Retro formula being subpar.
NEC contributions being inadequate.
These are my pillars. Now, because we're asking for a full rewrite and SWAPA said it's gonna happen, I'll wait to see the final product, language and all, and I'd encourage you to do the same. Less emotions, more brains.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
