Exactly...... Some things never change around here.

The timing of the MOU was perfect. For the company.

According to the MSM, SW is magnanimously giving "each" pilot $4500, right when the union announced the SAV.

 

I have no issue with this MOU after the fact. It does not hurt us and in fact is the definition of doing their job. They got us free money and said to use it as a strike fund. The MOU signing will not hurt the potential public perception of our SAV. I was just asked by a 32 year FA for us, “should I book on United if I need to get to my daughters wedding in June?” I of course asked “what you mean?” She mentions the strike vote. I have to explain it’s just a SAV and that’s a long away from a strike. BUT I did include, if it makes her feel better please book on United, at least they have a better chance to actually get her to the wedding. This is a 32 year airline vet that already has in her mind we strike on May 1. Most of my neighbors have asked about the strike and my wives business said at this time no need to book around WN but they are monitoring the situation.

If I was SWAPA I would have a full page ad in the WSJ talking about the SAV. Every billboard should include a mention of a strike. It seems to have had the desired effect….

 

At best, it does not help us move toward our ultimate goal of an industry-leading contract. I don't know how long you've been here, but the dynamics that played out behind this MOU are classic SWAPA 1.0 behavior.

Again, Casey stated, "Overwhelmingly, you replied that you had no interest in an MOU that was merely a one-time buy off unless the Company included Contract 2020 scheduling efficiencies." The gratitude pay MOU did not include any C2020 scheduling efficiencies. It was effectively a one-time buy-off called "gratitude pay."

The dynamic that concerns me most is that SWAPA says one thing like Casey said above. Then, when a little coin is dangled in front of our faces, we immediately drop our stated principles and change our tune. It's just like The Platform from the last contract cycle. The entire BOD and all of SWAPA's executives signed a bold letter promising that they wouldn't settle for less than The Platform. But then, when the company dangled a bit of bonus/retro payment, some mediocre rate raises, and a B-fund in front of our faces, SWAPA couldn't drop The Platform quickly enough and metamorphosed from play-acting the not-taking-sh**-from-no-one-fake-Texas rancher into a just-happy-to-have-a-job-at-SWA sellout.

That's what we've done at SWAPA since the 70's. This is just another data point confirming that we haven't truly deviated much from that trajectory. I'm sure it's reassuring to the company executives and their FH advisors.

This morning's ELITT glitch and the response of the BOD members who took advantage of it at the expense of their constituents is just one more small example of SWAPA's pretty gross history of compromising their principles for a little cash. Those reps basically told those who called them out on their behavior OTOF, "Who cares? You don't like it? Sue me." It just helps the company confirm to themselves that SWAPA is the same old SWAPA at heart.

 

That was wrong on those two for sure. JA at least came back and explained. Give him kudos for that. Matt can GFH!

 

So let me get this straight. After the dust has settled the company offered up an MOU that pays us for getting caught in the crossfire. That MOU is worth like 45M BUT you are against it?!? WTF is wrong with you??? If the union, whose job it is to make me money and protect me making money, would have said no to that they should have been tarred and feathered. They gave up nothing and held the line that an MOU to “fix” their problems is not going to happen. They upheld that part of the bargain 100 percent.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face….

 

Well, we disagree. I explained why. You don't have to agree. I'm not going to insinuate that there's something wrong with you.

 

Are you Steve?

 

Boys, boys. While I agree with one of you, I understand both sides. Let’s not let this divide us.

 

APC is an anonymous forum for a reason. TOF is not anonymous for its own reasons. I'm not going to ask anyone here to publicly identify themselves and I expect that no one else would ask me to do so. Privacy is an important part of the forum rules here.

 

The MOU was a bad call. Or it wasn’t. It’s subjective, and we’re not going to arrive at a right answer.

What is 100% certain is that it’s a done deal, and isn’t going to change now. There is very little use discussing things that have already happened.

We still retain all the leverage, and the only thing we should be focusing on is convincing those that are disengaged to vote to strike.

Lew, your educational posts are probably the best thing going on the APC forum. Please keep them up.

Let’s keep our eyes on the prize. This is still shaping up very well for us, let’s stay unified and get it done!