View Single Post
Old 10-11-2009 | 08:09 AM
  #113  
OscartheGrouch's Avatar
OscartheGrouch
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 998
Likes: 0
From: B737/Capt
Default

Originally Posted by phatigued
Zoooropa,

I apologize for not taking the time to read all the pages of this thread. Your post was pointed out to me by a friend. There have been MANY inaccuracies posted from both sides and I'd simply post the "offers" on the web for all to read, but that would only stir the pot and not allow the wounds to properly heal.

Both sides were completely constrained by TIME and no true negotiations could take place with such an egregious time line. The reason we held our ground was a simple matter of our membership would have been 100% agreeable to either outcome. Staple or "no-deal". Anything else would have involved membership education, BOD endorsement, and true-give-and-take negotiations. We had 5 hours to do all that. That couldn't happen so we with with the only winning proposal in our arsenal.

To specifically answer your 2 outstanding questions.

1. Had SWAPA agreed to be the "bargaining unit" for the furloughed pilots, SWAPA would have had a DFR responsibility to those pilots. Until the fence comes down, that would be unacceptable. Even more confusing, SWAPA's NC was driving back to SWAPA with an "offer" from the company with regard to our Section 6. In that agreement is a "no furough clause" during any fence agreement. It would be hard to have a DFR responsibility to furloughees that have a RIGHT to employment at SWAPA. FAPA would have still remained their bargaining unit and that is the way it is normally done. No confusion. Keep the entities completely SPLIT until the fence come down.

2. Our president told me he called your president first thing in the morning to talk before the day's events got rolling. He told him to call any time with concerns and that our last offer was on the table to accept any time without condition through the day. But I understand if heresay isn't good enough.

I personally e-mailed John :

" From: xxxxxxx
Subject: talks
Date: August 13, 2009 12:32:31 PM CDT
To: [email protected]
Cc:

John,

I know nothing has transpired yet with regard to the SWA bid. I certainly don't think we need to have face time in the next few days if things are just status quo, but we were wondering what your thoughts were on our next talks.

Tom
M&A"

So, contact was attempted at least twice. What John and Carl talked about that morning was just what Carl briefed me as I wasn't party to those conversations.

Tom Winsor
SWAPA M&A Committee
Thanks for getting on APC "Phatigued"

Well here it is folks! A member of the SWA M&A committee engaging us on APC and maybe willing to answer some direct questions if you have any left. I for one have seen enough he said/she said from those whose credibility (on both sides) based on emotion alone would lead me to dismiss most of what they have to say. The time available to come to an integration agreement seems to be the real limiting factor and any other theories are apparently conjecture. I have heard it said by SWA posters that anything but a staple would be unacceptable and I have heard from FAPA posters that I don't want to be on reserve again or that some don't want to lose their cushy Orlando turns. Does anybody really believe that either extreme position by the unions would be attainable if time constraints had not been imposed? I for one am asking this question so that all sides can learn from what transpired and maybe come to the table the next time with something reasonable.

Even the RAH/F9 folks preparing to do "battle" have dug into postions that are unreasonable. Engaging in career "expectations" and "I fly for a Major vs. a Regional who saved you" thinking somehow an arbitrator will see their side over the other. I say go to an arbitrator now and save yourself the trouble of sitting down and doing the "right" thing. I don't think that pilot groups are capable of working it out unless pain is spread evenly. Good luck we are all counting on you.

The Oscar
Reply