Originally Posted by
Trowserchilli
I appreciate your $0.02.
These contracts are cyclical business deals and negotiations. Nothing more, nothing less.
There's a new CBA on the horizon for F9. Then another groups will be less than ours. Then ours less than someone else's.
Same **** over and over. Take F9 out of the equation and replace it with whatever carrier you want and your contract will eventually be at the bottom. Just a few years ago Spirits was at the top for the A320 while a few legacies were not and they were also having their pensions wiped out. Were they embarrassed?
This career is a lifetime of continuing to negotiate for more. I'm not ridiculing or criticizing you. Just trying to bring some positivity to the table. This is a great, deserving pilot group. Our new contract is coming. There's boxes that have to be checked along the way.
Nevertheless our day is coming.
Trowser: ^^^ An intelligent approach to all of this.
You posted an article by
Fortune a few pages back that intrigued me. Apparently it is possible to kill (or at least maim) the golden goose with higher end labor friendly contracts. The article very directly made the case that Southwest would lose it's edge as an LCC because of increased labor costs.
If I had my wishes we would have an industry
leading contract, as in, when they send out a new graph, the top line IS in forest green. But my question is whether this isn't only unrealistic, but also unwise? If you believe the Fortune article...
I've felt frustrated at times that our first ask was too low. But I'm beginning to think there's a reason I'm just a rank-and-file pilot.
I guess my question to the forum is this: Does the idea of harming the golden goose actually play a role in any NC's strategy? Or is it their job to shoot for the moon no matter what? Wouldn't this Fortune article strike a measure of dread into a SW pilot's understandably euphoric heart?
Do you guys get what I'm saying/asking?