AT and SWA SLI: How to make it work.
08-25-2011, 05:00 AM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,638
ALPA does not generally recommend. They give you the possible ramifications of each choice or option. They also give you the possible legal issues. The AirTran MEC was well briefed on what options SW might have between Airtrans scope section and the transition agreement and what the risks of a no vote might be. I am sure they took all that into consideration. SW's hands appear to be somewhat tied between federal law and both the scope and transition agreements.
There is case law and history about trying to maintain two airlines and furloughing on one side only. See NWA/Republic as a example.
I still don't understand all the SW angst at the no vote. It will go to arbitration. You feel you have a very strong position. You will get the chance to voice that to the arbitrator.
08-25-2011, 05:24 AM
#72
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 17
The number of pilots for each group on this site is a VERY SMALL percentage of the whole! To lump a whole group into an overly generalized opinion expressed by a very few, is naive at best. Not all Luv pilots have a superiority complex and a healthy portion of arrogance . Not all AT guys are two time LUV interview failures~ or whatever stereotype fits. Both groups are much more moderate than any opinions offered here. Yes of course there are yahoo's at both, but most are great considerate people looking out for their families' futures.
I don't think any of us can know what the respective group wants because we don't really know what the options of the whole (AT and LUV) are at this point. SL9 is dead and what comes next as far as options go, is totally unknown.
But why not express what you think is gonna work? There seems to be a rapid shoot down of what won't work so what do you think will?
I don't think any of us can know what the respective group wants because we don't really know what the options of the whole (AT and LUV) are at this point. SL9 is dead and what comes next as far as options go, is totally unknown.
But why not express what you think is gonna work? There seems to be a rapid shoot down of what won't work so what do you think will?
08-25-2011, 05:46 AM
#73
Don't want to participate
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: 737 Left Seat
Posts: 1,016
The only problem is that it doesn't matter what you or I think is fair. I think that both unions put forth unreasonable expectations to their memberships. Negotiations are effectively over, there is no other deal to be struck.
I can guarantee that if I told you what I thought was fair, you wouldn't agree. You're not a SWA guy, right?
I can guarantee that if I told you what I thought was fair, you wouldn't agree. You're not a SWA guy, right?
08-25-2011, 05:54 AM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,910
This reminds me of the Frontier thing where they all acted like a jilted lover for months afterward.
What's really funny is the claim that SWA's superb management is "angry". Anger has no place in the boardroom or the executive suite. This was a foreseeable, and some would say fully expected, event. To think that SWA management didn't expect it, and is now angry is laughable and only suitable for the BS spamming that's occurring. SWA management checked a box on their PERT diagram and is moving to the next step, which is to wait for the results of mediation or arbitration.
At this point, everything is spin.
Nu
08-25-2011, 06:27 AM
#75
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
(c)
APPLICATION.—This section shall not apply to any covered transaction involving a covered air
carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.
and 2) RAH didn't acquire Midwest, fire the pilots and then continue to operate the same airplanes and assets. They grounded and/or sold all the MD-80s and 717s they were operating. They really only kept the Midwest name and used RAH crewed Embraers, RJs, etc.
I suppose SWA could fire the AirTran pilots -- if they also sell the fleet.
08-25-2011, 06:37 AM
#76
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by Check Essential
I suppose SWA [B
I suppose SWA [B
could[/B] fire the AirTran pilots -- if they also sell the fleet.
Possible I suppose, but with this economy, this job environment and this administration....doubtful.
08-25-2011, 06:51 AM
#77
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
Great stats 4th! You should post where you got those stats from, and how recent they are (if they're even valid).
Myself, I don't have any other applications on file (and before you write it), nor should I need to.
We're going to be integrated and all will be well. It won't be a landslide in either groups favor, and if it is, we'll both be lucky to be working at the bottom of Allegiant's list after they buy up the scraps of an airline once referred to as Southwest.
Fair and equitable? Is it possible?
Myself, I don't have any other applications on file (and before you write it), nor should I need to.
We're going to be integrated and all will be well. It won't be a landslide in either groups favor, and if it is, we'll both be lucky to be working at the bottom of Allegiant's list after they buy up the scraps of an airline once referred to as Southwest.
Fair and equitable? Is it possible?
I've had a former AT guy, now SWA pilot tell me that part of the reason AT upgrades are faster is because so many pilots quit to go elsewhere. I'm sure that will be looked into.
Remember, as part of the process agreement, the company agreed to provide all pertinent employment records from both companies.
08-25-2011, 07:05 AM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 548
Midwest was different. McCaskill-Bond didn't apply for 2 reasons. 1) the timing of when that law passed (late 2008)
(c)
(c)
APPLICATION.—This section shall not apply to any covered transaction involving a covered air
carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.
and 2) RAH didn't acquire Midwest, fire the pilots and then continue to operate the same airplanes and assets. They grounded and/or sold all the MD-80s and 717s they were operating. They really only kept the Midwest name and used RAH crewed Embraers, RJs, etc.
I suppose SWA could fire the AirTran pilots -- if they also sell the fleet.
carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.
and 2) RAH didn't acquire Midwest, fire the pilots and then continue to operate the same airplanes and assets. They grounded and/or sold all the MD-80s and 717s they were operating. They really only kept the Midwest name and used RAH crewed Embraers, RJs, etc.
I suppose SWA could fire the AirTran pilots -- if they also sell the fleet.
I guess you conviently forgot about the "intergate" part of M/B. I did not say anything about it.
As I said earlier, I think there is a point in the arbitrator award that SWAPA and GK have already predetermined that they will begin transferring assets and just liquidate Guadalupe. To ignore this possibility is suicide. SWA already transferred all the orders. They have stripped entire departments out of AT. SWA picks up ATL ops in Feb. and AT starts reducing. They could slowly bleed away the most profitable flights until all that's left are the routes that will be eliminated and the 717's.
I have many friend's at AT and a few of the smarter ones were saying minutes after the announcement that this was going to be a train wreck as opposed to the back flipping cheerleaders high fiving each other in the ATL (yea, you know who you are). For their sake I hope it isn't, but to ignore the 500# gorilla in the room is stupid.
SWAPA will sell out you and all your families future if they can capture a single dime. They will smile to your face, pat you on back telling you all is well while holding a dagger. They care about one thing, SWAPA.
While I personally would love to see AT win a huge, fair award and force the integration, it is a monster gamble.
My point is simple. Don't lose sight of the worst case scenario and don't hide behind M/B. Good luck.
08-25-2011, 07:07 AM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
I'm certain that SWAPA has those numbers and it will be argued in mediation arbitration. I don't know what those numbers are, but do you really doubt that there's a huge disparity between the two in that number?
I've had a former AT guy, now SWA pilot tell me that part of the reason AT upgrades are faster is because so many pilots quit to go elsewhere. I'm sure that will be looked into.
Remember, as part of the process agreement, the company agreed to provide all pertinent employment records from both companies.
I've had a former AT guy, now SWA pilot tell me that part of the reason AT upgrades are faster is because so many pilots quit to go elsewhere. I'm sure that will be looked into.
Remember, as part of the process agreement, the company agreed to provide all pertinent employment records from both companies.
It might, it might not. Hope both sides have good SLI lawyers.....
08-25-2011, 07:08 AM
#80
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
I think it would be the first time in history if an arbitrator considers how many pilots have applications in at another airline. I'm not sure how he would even gather that data. I doubt too many SWA or AirTran pilots have reported to their management that they are applying elsewhere.
