Relevance of 717 to SWA continues to diminish
09-07-2011, 09:27 AM
#212
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
09-07-2011, 09:45 AM
#213
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
Actually, I didn't complain. I merely attempted to show the irony of your statements about not wanting to directly negotiate with SWA when that is exactly what you are currently in the process of. If any party has the the ability to just walk away it is indeed ALPA. SWA will only walk away if they feel that that is in their best interest, which they clearly feel is not the case currently. If ALPA feels it is in their best interest to walk away they can exercise that option. It seems that currently SWA AND ALPA both feel that it is in their best interest to negotiate.
09-07-2011, 09:46 AM
#214
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,171
Braniff was founded in 1928 and went chap 7 in 1982 - they were a legacy airline. At certain times of its existance, Braniff was a fairly big player in the business. There was one point (1979-1980) where Braniff flew Concordes between DC and Dallas.
Midway Airlines was the first post-deregulation airline, followed by New York Air.
09-07-2011, 10:02 AM
#215
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
Actually for me the murky portion is the future ramifications and consequences that might pop up if a deal is brokered. The tightrope walk that will be needed to keep this place from becoming an inhospitable place to work may be too difficult a task for the players involved to accomplish. I for one would love a reset, a mulligan if you will. Let's just all forget the entire deal and everyone can go back to doing their own thing. Southwest will continue their death spiral because they are no longer able to capture the low hanging fruit. AirTran will continue to steadily turn a good profit and ALPA will continue to expand its compensation package through section 6 negotiations. That is my fantasy world, anyone care to join me.
09-07-2011, 10:05 AM
#216
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,046
I'll be a total jerk once again for the sake of clarification. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was signed by Jimmy Carter (who until very recently held the dubious distinction of being the worst president in my lifetime).
Braniff was founded in 1928 and went chap 7 in 1982 - they were a legacy airline. At certain times of its existance, Braniff was a fairly big player in the business. There was one point (1979-1980) where Braniff flew Concordes between DC and Dallas.
Midway Airlines was the first post-deregulation airline, followed by New York Air.
Braniff was founded in 1928 and went chap 7 in 1982 - they were a legacy airline. At certain times of its existance, Braniff was a fairly big player in the business. There was one point (1979-1980) where Braniff flew Concordes between DC and Dallas.
Midway Airlines was the first post-deregulation airline, followed by New York Air.
As for your list of Presidents, G.H.W. Bush ends up in the bottom 5 on most lists, Carter around 10 to 13 from the bottom and Obama is currently in the top 15. The most authoritative list, according to US News and World Report is as follows, for the worst:
32. James Carter
33. Zachary Taylor
34. Benjamin Harrison
35. William Henry Harrison
36. Herbert Hoover
37. John Tyler
38. Millard Fillmore
39. George W. Bush
40. Franklin Pierce
41. Warren G. Harding
42. James Buchanan
43. Andrew Johnson
09-07-2011, 10:15 AM
#217
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
You are unbelievably smug. You seem to want to blame everyone but yourself and the legacies that made these decisions. I can only assume that your CL65 experience came while you were one of those "little darlings" and living in a world that YOU fostered. The relaxation of scope directly caused these problems. If you so badly wanted to "keep something worth keeping" but are unable to compete in a free market society then I humbly suggest you choose another airline or another profession.
De-regulation fostered the economics of the current airline industry. Some entities were able to adapt and prosper and some weren't.
De-regulation fostered the economics of the current airline industry. Some entities were able to adapt and prosper and some weren't.
You are correct, I have over 5K hrs in an RJ, but I only got it after the industry gave away the RJ's and the LCC's started pilfering routes. I got the time in the RJ because the only places hiring were LCC's. In fact I already had letters from a few companies in 2001 offering interviews and employment, but all of that dried up by mid 2001.
Scope relaxation was the answer the legacies had for the onslaught of the LCC"s and their pilots willing to accept less. Rj's were another poor mistake, but do not think they were the sole reason for what we experience today. They were a poor answer on how to thwart off the low and ultra-low cost carriers. Yes, it has left the legacies with a diluted brand, and an industry with no/low customer loyalty, RASM in the toilet, and customers now seeing air travel as public transportation.
Things that did not help:
1) Airlines like SWA, who was a National airline at least 20 years ago requiring their pilots to posses a 737 type prior to starting the job. (SWAPA not demanding this go away)
2) Lance Captains which in reality cut those guys pay, and captain positions.
3) Airline pilots willing to accept a 401K as their retirement, when the industry norm was a Pension.
4) Pilots willing to get paid less (at the time by a fair sum) (SWAPA, NKS, ATA, ATN) over their counterparts at the legacies etc, with the hopes of quick growth to expedite their time to the left seat.
Just to be clear, I have no issue work with efficiency. I like SWA's trip construction because it uses the pilots time efficiently, but many of your pilots are busting their humps because as Gecko says, "Greed is good." The almighty dollar and the pursuit their of, in itself is not a bad thing, but undercutting your own profession to the point that the profession is now, is what I take issue with, not efficiency. One can be efficient with their time without getting to where we are today. If you look at SWAPA's last few agreements with the company, they have not been quick or produced the returns that previous agreements have. Why? Simple, the pilots of those other carriers fell by the weight of the underdog; SWA, and as a result SWA now needs to compete cost wise with these carriers. Remember compeition is a good thing, but now instead of being on the giving end, SWA and its pilots find themselves' on the receiving end. Raises will be less, stagnation will continue, the four to five year upgrade will give way to career FO's that will demand more than what they have gotten in the past. The retirement that was acceptable because of the quick upgrade will no longer be acceptable to those who are stuck at a point where the quick growth will not effect them.
It was a great run, and I admire Herb for his savvy, but with everything, eventually you must live in the wold (industry) you have helped create.
Again, RJ's were a wrong answer, but put the chronology in the correct sequence. They were a poor answer to the misjudgement of the LCC's era. Legacy airlines mortgaged their companies thinking that the LCC"s were a fad, when they were wrong, the RJ appeared to be the savor, which it was not, but instead a boat anchor. The result was a CH11 era in the airlines where the legacy costs were slashed, and all of a sudden the new norm was slightly below that of SWA. It does not effect the executives, but the workers, and the customers. Both have suffered with less service, and we with less pay and benefits. We can keep going around and around that competition is good, and it is. I like capitalism, but understand that too much of a good thing results in less for all, with what you are purchasing being a shadow of what it once was.
For the SWA pilot it is intangible because you cannot see what you would have had, you currently see yourselves at the top, and you are. My point was if there was a little less vigor to kill the legacies on the part of the LCC's and their pilots, there will still be more at the table for all to enjoy. I highly suspect that if the majors did not go though CH11 and their liquidity issues, we would be paid far more than we currently are, and as a direct result of that, the industry leading pay on the 73N would not be SWA at 212 an hr. That concept is very hard for a lot to grasp.
*Do not forget that during DAL's CH11 the company was doing everything they could to get costs below that of SWA. Why? Because they say you as the reason for the issue and if their costs could be less than theirs, they could then compete with you. They wanted their pilots on the low end of the compensation spectrum.
09-07-2011, 10:19 AM
#218
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I'll be a total jerk once again for the sake of clarification. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was signed by Jimmy Carter (who until very recently held the dubious distinction of being the worst president in my lifetime).
Braniff was founded in 1928 and went chap 7 in 1982 - they were a legacy airline. At certain times of its existance, Braniff was a fairly big player in the business. There was one point (1979-1980) where Braniff flew Concordes between DC and Dallas.
Midway Airlines was the first post-deregulation airline, followed by New York Air.
Braniff was founded in 1928 and went chap 7 in 1982 - they were a legacy airline. At certain times of its existance, Braniff was a fairly big player in the business. There was one point (1979-1980) where Braniff flew Concordes between DC and Dallas.
Midway Airlines was the first post-deregulation airline, followed by New York Air.
09-07-2011, 10:33 AM
#219
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
But is in your best interest to make sure that the company doesn't run rough shod over the guys you are about to share the workplace with.
Bullplop. That proposal didn't hit SWAPA out of the blue. There is no way you will convince me of that. Ya'll knew before the ink was dry what was in it.. long before the ATN guys did... and you thought it was a great deal. You should have told the company then.. Or is the company not reeeeally all that interested in YOUR input. If that is true, so much for your great relationship with management.
Bullplop. That proposal didn't hit SWAPA out of the blue. There is no way you will convince me of that. Ya'll knew before the ink was dry what was in it.. long before the ATN guys did... and you thought it was a great deal. You should have told the company then.. Or is the company not reeeeally all that interested in YOUR input. If that is true, so much for your great relationship with management.
09-07-2011, 10:56 AM
#220
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
You are correct, I have over 5K hrs in an RJ, but I only got it after the industry gave away the RJ's and the LCC's started pilfering routes. I got the time in the RJ because the only places hiring were LCC's. In fact I already had letters from a few companies in 2001 offering interviews and employment, but all of that dried up by mid 2001.
Scope relaxation was the answer the legacies had for the onslaught of the LCC"s and their pilots willing to accept less. Rj's were another poor mistake, but do not think they were the sole reason for what we experience today. They were a poor answer on how to thwart off the low and ultra-low cost carriers. Yes, it has left the legacies with a diluted brand, and an industry with no/low customer loyalty, RASM in the toilet, and customers now seeing air travel as public transportation.
Things that did not help:
1) Airlines like SWA, who was a National airline at least 20 years ago requiring their pilots to posses a 737 type prior to starting the job. (SWAPA not demanding this go away)
2) Lance Captains which in reality cut those guys pay, and captain positions.
3) Airline pilots willing to accept a 401K as their retirement, when the industry norm was a Pension.
4) Pilots willing to get paid less (at the time by a fair sum) (SWAPA, NKS, ATA, ATN) over their counterparts at the legacies etc, with the hopes of quick growth to expedite their time to the left seat.
Just to be clear, I have no issue work with efficiency. I like SWA's trip construction because it uses the pilots time efficiently, but many of your pilots are busting their humps because as Gecko says, "Greed is good." The almighty dollar and the pursuit their of, in itself is not a bad thing, but undercutting your own profession to the point that the profession is now, is what I take issue with, not efficiency. One can be efficient with their time without getting to where we are today. If you look at SWAPA's last few agreements with the company, they have not been quick or produced the returns that previous agreements have. Why? Simple, the pilots of those other carriers fell by the weight of the underdog; SWA, and as a result SWA now needs to compete cost wise with these carriers. Remember compeition is a good thing, but now instead of being on the giving end, SWA and its pilots find themselves' on the receiving end. Raises will be less, stagnation will continue, the four to five year upgrade will give way to career FO's that will demand more than what they have gotten in the past. The retirement that was acceptable because of the quick upgrade will no longer be acceptable to those who are stuck at a point where the quick growth will not effect them.
It was a great run, and I admire Herb for his savvy, but with everything, eventually you must live in the wold (industry) you have helped create.
Again, RJ's were a wrong answer, but put the chronology in the correct sequence. They were a poor answer to the misjudgement of the LCC's era. Legacy airlines mortgaged their companies thinking that the LCC"s were a fad, when they were wrong, the RJ appeared to be the savor, which it was not, but instead a boat anchor. The result was a CH11 era in the airlines where the legacy costs were slashed, and all of a sudden the new norm was slightly below that of SWA. It does not effect the executives, but the workers, and the customers. Both have suffered with less service, and we with less pay and benefits. We can keep going around and around that competition is good, and it is. I like capitalism, but understand that too much of a good thing results in less for all, with what you are purchasing being a shadow of what it once was.
For the SWA pilot it is intangible because you cannot see what you would have had, you currently see yourselves at the top, and you are. My point was if there was a little less vigor to kill the legacies on the part of the LCC's and their pilots, there will still be more at the table for all to enjoy. I highly suspect that if the majors did not go though CH11 and their liquidity issues, we would be paid far more than we currently are, and as a direct result of that, the industry leading pay on the 73N would not be SWA at 212 an hr. That concept is very hard for a lot to grasp.
*Do not forget that during DAL's CH11 the company was doing everything they could to get costs below that of SWA. Why? Because they say you as the reason for the issue and if their costs could be less than theirs, they could then compete with you. They wanted their pilots on the low end of the compensation spectrum.
Scope relaxation was the answer the legacies had for the onslaught of the LCC"s and their pilots willing to accept less. Rj's were another poor mistake, but do not think they were the sole reason for what we experience today. They were a poor answer on how to thwart off the low and ultra-low cost carriers. Yes, it has left the legacies with a diluted brand, and an industry with no/low customer loyalty, RASM in the toilet, and customers now seeing air travel as public transportation.
Things that did not help:
1) Airlines like SWA, who was a National airline at least 20 years ago requiring their pilots to posses a 737 type prior to starting the job. (SWAPA not demanding this go away)
2) Lance Captains which in reality cut those guys pay, and captain positions.
3) Airline pilots willing to accept a 401K as their retirement, when the industry norm was a Pension.
4) Pilots willing to get paid less (at the time by a fair sum) (SWAPA, NKS, ATA, ATN) over their counterparts at the legacies etc, with the hopes of quick growth to expedite their time to the left seat.
Just to be clear, I have no issue work with efficiency. I like SWA's trip construction because it uses the pilots time efficiently, but many of your pilots are busting their humps because as Gecko says, "Greed is good." The almighty dollar and the pursuit their of, in itself is not a bad thing, but undercutting your own profession to the point that the profession is now, is what I take issue with, not efficiency. One can be efficient with their time without getting to where we are today. If you look at SWAPA's last few agreements with the company, they have not been quick or produced the returns that previous agreements have. Why? Simple, the pilots of those other carriers fell by the weight of the underdog; SWA, and as a result SWA now needs to compete cost wise with these carriers. Remember compeition is a good thing, but now instead of being on the giving end, SWA and its pilots find themselves' on the receiving end. Raises will be less, stagnation will continue, the four to five year upgrade will give way to career FO's that will demand more than what they have gotten in the past. The retirement that was acceptable because of the quick upgrade will no longer be acceptable to those who are stuck at a point where the quick growth will not effect them.
It was a great run, and I admire Herb for his savvy, but with everything, eventually you must live in the wold (industry) you have helped create.
Again, RJ's were a wrong answer, but put the chronology in the correct sequence. They were a poor answer to the misjudgement of the LCC's era. Legacy airlines mortgaged their companies thinking that the LCC"s were a fad, when they were wrong, the RJ appeared to be the savor, which it was not, but instead a boat anchor. The result was a CH11 era in the airlines where the legacy costs were slashed, and all of a sudden the new norm was slightly below that of SWA. It does not effect the executives, but the workers, and the customers. Both have suffered with less service, and we with less pay and benefits. We can keep going around and around that competition is good, and it is. I like capitalism, but understand that too much of a good thing results in less for all, with what you are purchasing being a shadow of what it once was.
For the SWA pilot it is intangible because you cannot see what you would have had, you currently see yourselves at the top, and you are. My point was if there was a little less vigor to kill the legacies on the part of the LCC's and their pilots, there will still be more at the table for all to enjoy. I highly suspect that if the majors did not go though CH11 and their liquidity issues, we would be paid far more than we currently are, and as a direct result of that, the industry leading pay on the 73N would not be SWA at 212 an hr. That concept is very hard for a lot to grasp.
*Do not forget that during DAL's CH11 the company was doing everything they could to get costs below that of SWA. Why? Because they say you as the reason for the issue and if their costs could be less than theirs, they could then compete with you. They wanted their pilots on the low end of the compensation spectrum.
The game abruptly changed. The legacies went to their pilots and asked for their help in order to compete. ALPA and the other unions made huge mistakes by believing managements assertions that the only way to compete would be through the relaxation of scope. SWA was in fact competing very well and all the while holding on to industry leading scope. Where I believe we differ in opinion is the reasons behind their success. You claim that SWA was successful because it had pilots willing to undercut the industry in pay scale. My assertion is that as SWA began to grow as a national carrier, they never sold the scope and never were able to match the gains at their competitors because of the dividends produced from the scope sale. If you would have said we will consider taking less compensation in order to compete in the brave new world of LCC's, but we will not sell you our flying and growth it may have turned out much better for you. In the end the vast majority of legacies went through nasty bankruptcies and gave back much of their compensation package and yet still were stuck with the scope deals they made previously. I think if you could have made minor givebacks out of the ridiculous BK arena you would have in fact fared much better and ultimately had much more control of your careers and the industry as a whole. SWA had a completely sustainable model and weathered even the roughest storms without givebacks.
I guess we can play the what came first game, the chicken or the egg and still not see eye to eye.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
