The key lesson here is that extreme positions, while seeming to be power negotiations, are really not. They key to negotiating is to get the other side to make hard choices not easy ones. Let's say your house is worth $300,000. If I offer you $1,000 for your house that is not power negotiations, that is just idiocy. You wouldn't have to think for a millisecond about that offer. If I offer you $285,000 in a down market, then you have a tough choice to make.

Neither SWAPA nor FAPA made each other make a tough choice. They both stood out on extremes trying to "protect their pilots." In essence, all they did was take their pilots completely out of the game. I have heard that both sides were "hiding the ball" by not revealing their positions. That is like negotiating for the blue car when you really want the red one.

Many pilots like to see their negotiators take extreme positions to show how tough they are. Taking such positions only lessens the credibility of the negotiating team, they do nothing to advance your position.

Arbitration is the same way. Inexperienced people will take extreme positions thinking arbitration is just finding a middle ground between the two sides. That is not how it works. Experienced arbitrators will be much more impressed with maintaining credibility by working for a real solution, rather than standing out in left field making outrageous claims.

My advice to SWAPA (and FAPA) is to try to imagine the arbitration result (in the real world, not in fantasy world) and then move towards that. A staple job was a ridiculous position and it did nothing except make the SWA pilots feel good about themselves for about 4 days. In the end, they blew a great opportunity for their company and for their pilot group.

 

[QUOTE=alfaromeo;663668]The key lesson here is that extreme positions, while seeming to be power negotiations, are really not. They key to negotiating is to get the other side to make hard choices not easy ones. Let's say your house is worth $300,000. If I offer you $1,000 for your house that is not power negotiations, that is just idiocy. You wouldn't have to think for a millisecond about that offer. If I offer you $285,000 in a down market, then you have a tough choice to make.

Neither SWAPA nor FAPA made each other make a tough choice. They both stood out on extremes trying to "protect their pilots." In essence, all they did was take their pilots completely out of the game. I have heard that both sides were "hiding the ball" by not revealing their positions. That is like negotiating for the blue car when you really want the red one.

Many pilots like to see their negotiators take extreme positions to show how tough they are. Taking such positions only lessens the credibility of the negotiating team, they do nothing to advance your position.

Arbitration is the same way. Inexperienced people will take extreme positions thinking arbitration is just finding a middle ground between the two sides. That is not how it works. Experienced arbitrators will be much more impressed with maintaining credibility by working for a real solution, rather than standing out in left field making outrageous claims.

My advice to SWAPA (and FAPA) is to try to imagine the arbitration result (in the real world, not in fantasy world) and then move towards that. A staple job was a ridiculous position and it did nothing except make the SWA pilots feel good about themselves for about 4 days. In the end, they blew a great opportunity for their company and for their pilot group.[/QUO

i shouldnt post when i'm cranky

 

"In the end, they blew a great opportunity for their company and for their pilot group."

In the end, the F9 pilots threw their "golden tickets" into the trash. Ultimately I predict failure of the entire Republic/Midwest/F9 merger (as in CH7). I hope I'm wrong, but that's my prediction.

 

There are a few former TWA pilots that are still waiting to cash in their golden tickets at AA too.