Originally Posted by 320busdriver (Post 1083705)

Short call credit question.
On Monday I was on short call. They assigned me short call on Tue which I acknowledged via ICREW (early afternoon on Mon). Later on Monday I was assigned a 2 day trip. On my way to the airport scheduling called me a changed my trip to a one day trip because there was a low time pilot conflict with another crew. When I returned Mon. night I was on long call. Should I recieve credit for the short call that I was assigned on Tue?

Originally Posted by shoelu (Post 1083393)

You have a rudimentary understanding of our contract at best. The AT purchase was NOT a violation of our contract. There is a provision to run a wholly owned subsidiary for 24 months after final closing. After that 24 month window all flying must be done by SWAPA pilots. We do not allow ANY domestic code share period.

SWAPA took an immediate stand that they would not release the company from section 1 protections to facilitate this transaction. SWAPA's assertion was that you made this deal without our consent knowing full well the stipulations regarding acquisitions in our current CBA.

The leverage to make contract improvements that you speak of would have been made at the expense of relaxed scope to allow the company to realize synergies earlier in the transaction. That was a deal that SWAPA was unwilling to make. We will not sell our scope for monetary short term gain. Scope is like a religion here. Any scope give concession will never be regained going forward.

You correctly assert that management is not in fact looking out for the pilots directly. But, management is most definitely looking out for the PRODUCT. The reason we do not outsource or codeshare is built around control of the product that is produced. Southwest wants complete and total control of the product they provide to paying customers. For these and many other reasons codeshare is not done at SWA.

You state that management would get rid of the scope clause in order to facilitate an acquisition on a larger scale is completely incorrect. Management cannot nullify any portion of our CBA without OUR CONSENT. Our consent will never be given. We like the way the agreement is written. It provides many disincentives for anything other than internal growth. Our section 1 also provides protections against structuring any deal where another entity would eventually be the surviving carrier after a merger.

SWAPA's scope provides for any flying done for Southwest Airlines, in any capacity, will only be done by SWAPA pilots on the SWAPA Master Seniority List. We do not budge on that. We will not even allow a SWA sticker on another aircraft unless it is flown by a SWAPA pilot.

Pilot grievance at Southwest Airlines turns into a good deed | Airline Biz Blog | dallasnews.com

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 1083656)

On the other board, someone mentioned the American pilots might have a TA with a 3 percent raise up front followed by 1 percent every year. Is anyone else hearing this? We're screwed if this is true.

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1083654)

I just read the Council 20 Chairman's letter about the Flight Pay Loss resolutions.

Comment 1. His stock just went up among his constituents.

Comment 2. DALPA MEC: Wow, just wow, you folks need to go somewhere else!

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1083666)

FPL is a big issue, not so much in its use, but the transparency of it. I agree it needs to be posted post month. Checking schedule is good to keep track, but it also needs to be posted by the LEC's and the MEC since they come from two or three or four different budgets depending on it comes form the annual budget, smra account, or National for National's business.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1083651)

And then those ATl guys will MD to NYC.

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1083719)

So... does that mean you definitely ARE gonna put in an app at SWA?

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1083706)

If you were to look at the seniority of the 205 MEM pilots you're looking at a group who is senior in the A category and junior in the B category.

The most junior 320 A is slightly more senior then the plug on ATL 73N A and the plug on MEM DC9 A is senior to the ATL M88 A plug. Senior A's there but not necessarily "old", just senior kind of like the 7ER category.

All that to say if flying will now be covered out of ATL for MEM flying then ATL will have a place for them and hardly be noticed. ATL 88 has almost 1,000 total pilots and the 737 comes in around 500-600. Adding 60 give or take or so pilots won't make a huge difference to those two categories and even to the ATL 320 category it's not an incredible jump. So if flying increases and that flying is covered by all 3 ATL NBs then ATL can take all MEM new comers... except adding 200 people to your commute would be pure unadulterated hell. It'd be one thing if it was a reasonable drive but MEM is far from ATL.

See people will go in different directions. I know if I was forced to commute my choices in bidding would have very different priorities then what people would traditionally think.

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1083728)

The rest are junior, but they will go for the MD88 in ATL, especially the DC9 guys, who will feel a bit more comfortable. Some of the DC9 guys may go to DTW or MSP to finish out the DC9 stuff there,