![]() |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1134448)
Ok, I think I understand what you are saying...but you'll have to elaborate just a bit on your definition of seniority progression.
How do we control that? Even if we told ALPA to negotiate a -sweet- early out program, how do you 'force' the most senior guys to take it?
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1134456)
Scope. We have allowed the outsourcing of at least 50% of our list.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1134408)
Wonder if management is gaming the production balance in the AF/KLM JV and planning on renegotiating it rather than ever being in compliance?
Has management ever admitted to being out of compliance with the JV? Nope. They're likely to just claim we are wrong and they are in compliance. Then we file a secret grievance. There's argument over which statistics to use, what flights to include, the time frame, and some technicalities in the language and then the Master Chairman "constructively engages" and .... uh oh. We reset the balance just this once and they pinky-swear to accept ALPA's interpretation from now on. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1134450)
SWAPA's scope has served them well in the past, but going forward it will handcuff the company.. unless.. they buy a different aircraft type. (And that is fine with me, because that makes them even MORE like a legacy, and with their high costs, they will be ripe for attack)
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1134450)
They will NOT be able to fly international with their current fleet, and that means they (the corporation) will need code share, JVs or something like that. Sooooo... with that scope clause they are going to stagnate. But let's continue this case and return in 5 or 6 years and see who has grown more, and who is making more money.
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1134450)
Oh, and besides, the the DAL thread. If you wanna talk about the plague, let's go over to the doughnut thread where you can hold them up on high or to their thread...
/out Carl |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1134469)
History may provide some guidance. We've been there and done that regarding the allowable number of 76 seaters.
Has management ever admitted to being out of compliance with the JV? Nope. They're likely to just claim we are wrong and they are in compliance. Then we file a secret grievance. There's argument over which statistics to use, what flights to include, the time frame, and some technicalities in the language and then the Master Chairman "constructively engages" and .... uh oh. We reset the balance just this once and they pinky-swear to accept ALPA's interpretation from now on. Carl |
Originally Posted by Rudder
(Post 1134439)
But as an aside, what was the percentage for last year, was it 4.85% or different? thanx for the info slow.
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1134211)
Funny stuff right there.
Carl Is it the part where I admit to offering my opinion while you constantly and frequently spout opinions disguised as facts? I'm not sure you and I have the same sense of humor.:rolleyes: Btw still havent heard how the "independent unions"(an oxymoron, but I digress) out there function, or any one offering to answer the original question posed by slow. Talk about obfuscating...:eek: |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1134474)
That's an interesting thesis, but I don't think it will. SWA management simply doesn't understand the idea of outsourcing your product to a higher cost per ASM airline, while that airline tarnishes your brand with poor service. I don't understand that "concept" either. But DAL management is a true believer...despite what the numbers show.
|
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1134486)
funny stuff, huh?
Is it the part where I admit to offering my opinion while you constantly and frequently spout opinions disguised as facts? I'm not sure you and I have the same sense of humor.:rolleyes: Btw still havent heard how the "independent unions"(an oxymoron, but I digress) out there function, or any one offering to answer the original question posed by slow. Talk about obfuscating...:eek: Second, the original question posted by slowplay was based on an utterly false premise. He attempted to characterize the MEC committes as "middle managers" or "civil servants'. Since this is blatantly incorrect, the rhetorical question he asked is unanswerable...but of course he knew that when he framed the question. Carl |
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
(Post 1134378)
Timbo.
Your post made me do some research that's pretty darn depressing. In February 1995 I was a four year 727 First Officer. My hourly rate was $98.48. I contributed 6% to the Family Care Savings Plan, so my effective rate was $92.57. Interesting trip down memory lane. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1134490)
Southwest now codeshares with Volaris Airlines. You can go MDW-STL-MEX, & the STL-MEX is on Volaris.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1134490)
The outsourcing at SWA has begun.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1134490)
Gary Kelly has consistently said that costs need to decrease.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1134490)
The whole 'Bags fly free' thing is costing a lot of money, & the shareholders are starting to notice. You can bet he's not ready to hand out raises, especially since he just acquired a LOT more payroll with the acquisition of AirTran.
Carl |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:02 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands