View Single Post
Old 11-11-2011 | 07:06 AM
  #80142  
tsquare's Avatar
tsquare
No longer cares
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
The difference between our management and SWA management is that SWA management wants their pilots as a first choice, our management wants us a last choice. AirTran had outsourcing via some commuter (I forget who). After the merger, SWA was in violation of the SWAPA scope section. SWA management quickly agreed to cancel the AirTran outsourcing. Not because SWAPA negotiators put a gun to management's head, but because SWA management sees their pilots as the first and ONLY choice to do any flying with the Southwest brand.

Man...I wonder what that would feel like?

Carl
You are missing the bigger picture here too though Carl. The commuter flying was cancelled shortly after the merger was consummated, so that is not an issue. But since AT was a wholly owned subsidiary, THEY were a violation of the SWAPA scope clause, hence management's interference in the SLI process. AT could not fly under the SWA code as a separate entity, and management could not afford to do that. That is why GK went all Carl Icahn on them. Many think that this was a bad play though because he made second class citizens out of the AT pilots, and that will transfer to the group as a whole. Maybe.. maybe, they will be blinded by the money, but who knows? I would think that a AT captain that has been forced out of his seat would retain a fair amount of bitterness... I can't imagine that they would not. Your own Red/Green show should give you a better insight into that. My question is that SWAPA had a bunch of leverage to get contract improvements here, and chose not to do so, but rather let management come in and lower the hammer on their soon-to-be co workers. No way you can convince me that this was not a seniority grab based on that observation alone. Now comes all the lovey dovey stuff... and hopefully the AT guys will forget.. Point is though, you think it is management looking out for it's pilots, I see that very differently. Let's suppose that SWA made a run at an AK merger/purchase.. combination.. There will be those that argue that that would be a merger of equals.. I fail to see any difference in the AT merger save the payrates.. all 3 carriers fly 737s... period. I digress. Do you think the AK pilots would stand for being stapled in the same manner as the ATI guys? SWA management would be FORCED to come in with the same heavy handed tactics as they did with AT because of that scope clause. My bet is that if this scenario were to come up, that SWA management would get rid of that scope clause , or they would be forced to structure it in a different way.. as in maybe AK would be the surviving carrier. Thoughts?