AT and SWA SLI: How to make it work.
08-28-2011, 07:17 AM
#191
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
If GK truly wanted to operate AT as a seperate entity, there are no legal hurdles to jump over. He could get the synergies he is after through a simple code share agreement. He still has the power to run AT as he wishes and call the shots operationaly because they are still a wholly owned subsidiary.
One single AirTran pilot could file an application to combine your bargaining units and unify the contract. Then SWAPA would have a "duty of fair representation" to the AirTran pilots and you would have to either combine the lists or fight like USAir.
Read the NMB Determinations on "single transportation systems".
Single Transportation System
The Board’s Representation Manual (Manual) Section 19.4 provides that: "Any organization or individual may file an application, supported by evidence of representation or a showing of interest . . . seeking a NMB determination that a single transportation system exists."
It would be enormously expensive for SWA to maintain AT as a subsidiary and not integrate the operations. You would have to maintain separate everything and lose all the potential "synergies" that CEOs love about mergers and acquisitions.
Representation Manual Section 19.501 provides the factors for making a determination whether a single system of transportation exists.
In Trans World Airlines/Ozark Airlines, the Board cited the following indicia of a single transportation system:
[W]hether a combined schedule is published; how the carrier advertises its services; whether reservation systems are combined; whether tickets are issued on one carrier’s stock; if signs, logos and other publicly visible indicia have been changed to indicate only one carrier’s existence; whether personnel with public contact were held out as employees of one carrier; and whether the process of repainting planes and other equipment, to eliminate indications of separate existence, has been progressed.
Other factors investigated by the Board seek to determine if the carriers have combined their operations from a managerial and labor relations perspective. Here the Board investigates whether labor relations and personnel functions are handled by one carrier; whether there are a common management, common corporate officers and interlocking Boards of Directors; whether there is a combined workforce; and whether separate identities are maintained for corporate and other purposes.
14 NMB 218, 236 (1987).
The Board finds a single transportation system when there is substantial integration of operations, financial control, and labor and personnel functions. Northwest Airlines, Inc./Delta Air Lines, Inc., 37 NMB 88 (2009); Florida N. R.R, 34 NMB 142 (2007); GoJet Airlines, LLC and Trans States Airlines, Inc., 33 NMB 24 (2005); Burlington N. Santa Fe Ry. Co., 32 NMB 163 (2005).
Further, the Board has noted that a substantial degree of overlapping ownership, senior management, and Boards of Directors is critical to finding a single transportation system. Precision Valley Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Precision Airlines and Valley Flying Serv., Inc., d/b/a Northeast Express Reg’l Airlines, 20 NMB 619 (1993). The Board’s substantial integration of operations criteria does not, however, require total integration of operations. Allegheny Airlines, Inc. and Piedmont Airlines, Inc., 32 NMB 21, 28 (2004).
Here's a couple of those determinations.
Delta/Northwest:
http://www.nmb.gov/representation/deter2009/36n017.pdf
Republic Air:
http://www.nmb.gov/representation/deter2011/38n039.pdf
08-28-2011, 07:29 AM
#192
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 49
RD
08-28-2011, 07:52 AM
#193
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
I'm not the least bit concerned about DAL going out of business. And thanks, I enjoy immensely what I am doing
08-28-2011, 07:59 AM
#194
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: erb
Posts: 646
Latin...he doesn't know latin. FTB however, now that guy is fluent in latin ( probably 10 other languages too). Anyhow, New "nailed it again" on page 17. These Luv guys are scared silly that arbitration will give Airtran Pilots the respect they deserve, and the compensation that they have so richly earned. Ad hominem was in interesting choice when trying to insult. Here's one for ya boys..."should we bend over now"...AD KALENDAS GRAECAS!
08-28-2011, 08:07 AM
#195
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Question for SWA/ATI guys?
It's my understanding that a process agreement was signed jointly by SWA management as well as SWAPA and the ATI ALPA folks. I don't know the exact terms of course, but generally speaking it delineated the methodology of achieving a combined seniority list of pilots.
So... SWA management offers the ATI pilots a proposed seniority list that they feel heavily favors the SWA pilots. They reject the proposal. However the process agreement deals with this possibility in that the next step would be binding arbitration.
If, as some suggest is possible, SWA management decided they wanted to operate the two pilot groups separately and not unify them as one, doesn't that abrogate the terms of the process agreement?
It's my understanding that a process agreement was signed jointly by SWA management as well as SWAPA and the ATI ALPA folks. I don't know the exact terms of course, but generally speaking it delineated the methodology of achieving a combined seniority list of pilots.
So... SWA management offers the ATI pilots a proposed seniority list that they feel heavily favors the SWA pilots. They reject the proposal. However the process agreement deals with this possibility in that the next step would be binding arbitration.
If, as some suggest is possible, SWA management decided they wanted to operate the two pilot groups separately and not unify them as one, doesn't that abrogate the terms of the process agreement?
Seems like a lot of trouble to keep the pilots happy (again).
No one ever answered my question: Are the AT flight attendants going into their list DOH?
08-28-2011, 08:19 AM
#196
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
latin...he doesn't know latin. Ftb however, now that guy is fluent in latin ( probably 10 other languages too). Anyhow, new "nailed it again" on page 17. These luv guys are scared silly that arbitration will give airtran pilots the respect they deserve, and the compensation that they have so richly earned. Ad hominem was in interesting choice when trying to insult. Here's one for ya boys..."should we bend over now"...ad kalendas graecas!
никогда!!!
08-28-2011, 08:40 AM
#197
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,909
The blame should be placed on SWAPA for not ensuring their nut was covered before signing anything, and the membership that let them do it.
You get what you negotiate, not what you deserve. Kudos to the AT guys for rolling the hard six.
As for running two separate ops.... It can be done. It's expensive. Some of AT's departments have already been consolidated, and those functions would need to be restarted. The FAA mandates that EACH certificate have a minimum number of management people and departments. You can't cross-utilize departments from one certificate to another.
It costs a lot of bucks to run parallel ops. The SWA of 10 years ago would never have considered such a money wasting move.
Nu
08-28-2011, 09:02 AM
#198
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
I think the company realizes that would be damaging to the careers SWAPA pilots, and that's one of the reason the company is so involved in the process.
08-28-2011, 09:09 AM
#199
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
So you're telling me that your CBA's scope sucks bad enough to have an equal type operation carrier to be operating Southwest's code?
You guys need to get your heads out of the sand and realize that you've either got to give the AT guy a better deal in a quick negotiated SLI or prepare for arbitration.
You guys need to get your heads out of the sand and realize that you've either got to give the AT guy a better deal in a quick negotiated SLI or prepare for arbitration.
08-28-2011, 09:15 AM
#200
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
But, hey, it got you Steve Chase who is leading you down the path to arbitration. If SW/SWAPA would like to follow his lead...
Is this your first airline job? Ever work in any other industry besides aviation? You really seem devoted to one-track thinking. I bet you made Major very young. Lt. Col. maybe.
I work with several former Falcon drivers. Mostly good people. Mostly from C Springs. But after 15 years, they still don't know much about the airline industry; only know one company. This could be you.
Is this your first airline job? Ever work in any other industry besides aviation? You really seem devoted to one-track thinking. I bet you made Major very young. Lt. Col. maybe.
I work with several former Falcon drivers. Mostly good people. Mostly from C Springs. But after 15 years, they still don't know much about the airline industry; only know one company. This could be you.
You're incredibly predictable
BTW, I know a lot of dudes who were never in the service...very few of them are like you.
