RJSAviator76

Eeyore, we need that meme explaining the difference between a SWA 3-day and an AA 3-day. 🤣

SlipKid

For sure.

He's a good guy that I am sorry to see go, but I definitely get it.

I did a similar commute to MCO for 18 years. It absolutely sucked the life out of me, and other than the one month I forgot to bid (before we had the standing bid), I never had to sit reserve like he's been, and would have been doing for years.

I am glad to see that folks have other options these days, especially considering how much of a goat rope our operations have become in the last few years.

hoover

copied from zap

Mozam

On TOF our self proclaimed know it all clown advise against it, hence I am positive it is a good move. That guy ( TD) is wrong 100 percent of the time. I’m sure even his wife thinks he’s an idiot.

ZapBrannigan

What is his DEAL? Arguing against paid parking now? That attitude is a cancer upon this pilot group.
Another one airline wonder who thinks he has the industry all figured out.

Hobbit64

Deep seated hubris? Or maybe *more* paid trip pulls?

I figured out that you can ignore his comments on the other forum. And poof! I don’t have to deal with any FH lawyers or CK’s opinions. Just like benedict arnold’s negotiation update emails that i immediately swipe into oblivion. I just hope that TD gets a few pieces of silver for his continued betrayal.

SlipKid

Well, he IS the smartest man in the room. Just ask him.

Lewbronski

Last contract cycle, TD self-admittedly tells the story that he, along with a small group of other SWA pilots who haven’t come forward, was invited to the GO in a paid status by AK to discuss what was holding the pilot group back from ratifying a new contract. AK wanted pilot input.

So, this small working group of pilots went to the GO to discuss issues holding up our next contract. AK was reportedly so impressed with their ideas that a meeting between GK and the group was arranged. According to TD, shortly after that meeting with GK, TA-2 was arrived at.

Since the RLA requires that the company negotiate directly only with the recognized sole bargaining agent for a certified labor group (in our case SWAPA), a very strong argument can be made that what happened was a prima facie violation of the RLA. It didn’t just look like bad faith bargaining. It was bad faith bargaining.

But SWAPA never pursued that angle AFAIK. It could have handed us additional leverage during that contract cycle if the company was shown to be directly violating the RLA. Why SWAPA didn’t go after it, I don’t know. Did they not realize it was a violation of the RLA? Did they not think it was worth raising the issue? I don’t know.

Zard

it’s way more fun to report CKs emails as spam to suspicious@ our company email dot com.

Hobbit64

big chuckle
Brilliant!