Please, profess your wisdom, and tell us all how to vote.

 

If you’re familiar at all with what I’ve posted here, you’d know that I’m all in favor of the SAV, and then pushing toward a release.

Eye on the prize. Our goal is not to obtain a successful SAV and then fold, like Alaska and Delta, did without obtaining the best contract possible.

Our goal ought to be the best possible contract for the pilots of SWAPA given the leverage that’s available to us right now. The leverage that’s available to us right now could allow us to obtain the world’s best airline pilot contract, bar none.

It seems that SWAPA may be willing to stop far, far short of what we’re capable of obtaining. They’ll say or imply something like, “Best we could do. We promise.” And then, because (apparently) people like you will mindlessly reply, “SWAPA speaks for me. I’m voting yes,” we’ll all be working under something delivering far less compensation and far less quality of life for close to the next decade than we could have obtained.

The goal is to wake people like you up to what we’re capable of. What we’re capable of is not simply a successful SAV. We’re capable of much, much more.

Are you saying you’re willing to give up far short of where we could actually go? That doesn’t sound to me like that’s looking out for the best interests of the pilot group.

 

Lew, I appreciate the info you have been putting out on RLA and your push for a world wide top airline contract. You keep saying there are signals and signs and info coming out that we are probably going to be disappointed because SWAPA is probably going to stoop short of the best we can get. Can you be more specific about these signs and signals for us that weren’t around for the last contract negotiations?

 

I also appreciate the education pieces and have found them very valuable.

Lew is a cynic, and I don’t mean that in a negative way. You need cynics in this world and especially in this industry. Casey put out that he and the VPs had dinner with Bob and two of his minions. I don’t think there was any effort to hide that fact at all. It was framed as swapa communicating directly with the CEO on how they are being stonewalled by labor relations. I think that meeting is exactly what is supposed to happen and could be invaluable in speeding up this ridiculously long process. FWIW, all the comms coming from the CEO, COO, and flight ops is that they want the contract done, they understand they are going to pay market rates, etc etc. This is 180 out from the Gary and Mike show last contract when we were told we needed to do our part to keep costs low to preserve 15 percent ROIC, which as everyone knows is the key to getting into heaven for dead accountants.

So now is Bob Jordan’s chance to prove he is a man of his word. The message has been sent with no filter. Will he deliver? I don’t know, but I do know there is no excuse for him not to.

As far as industry lagging and being second tier, we all have a vote. I know what my lines in the sand are and they are sacred. It helps me make an unemotional decision. I also know that buried in the language may be something that I don’t particularly like. If it is enough to make me vote no, then I’ll do it. I don't care. No votes at this airline have typically resulted in a quick TA2 with big improvements. We also have the fortunate history of paying our retirees the retro they are owed, so our elder pilots have no reason to vote yes for a turd.

Hold the line, don’t be afraid to vote no, and absolutely hold swapas feet to the fire. We will get there, it is just going to take some time.

 

yeah, I’m not seeing them either. Even high level diplomats communicate during times of war…

 

Concisely and quickly, because I don’t have time to write a lengthy explanation. And, I’m pretty sure I’ve addressed each of these points in detail before;

1. Our long history of SWAPA 1.0 selling us out. We like to think that “this SWAPA” Is “SWAPA 2.0,” and therefore somewhat invulnerable to the same human motivations that corrupted SWAPA in earlier years. “SWAPA 2.0” still has a lot of SWAPA 1.0 DNA in it. Just do some research.
2. The fact that many of the same people who signed a letter swearing they wouldn’t settle for less than Platform and then settled for >$1B less than Platform are now handling this set of negotiations. That exact same dynamic came into play with the recent gratitude MOU. Casey said we wouldn’t sign any more MOU’s unless they were tied to C2020 improvements. The gratitude MOU wasn’t. The willingness to compromise our stated principle at the sight of some loose change is clearly still alive and well. That’s highly concerning.
3. The lack of real RLA education for years now. Why? There’s no real explanation besides rationalizations as lame as what some of the early ELITT’ing BOD reps provided last week. Why do I, some random line pilot, understand the RLA better than anyone I have heard from SWAPA who has written about it or discussed it? That’s sad. It’s not like I’m smarter or better than people in SWAPA. Something has to be able to explain that. The RLA isn’t rocket science. What explains it? They could understand it if they wanted to. Anyone could.
4. The delayed filing for mediation. We waited ~30 mo’s to file for mediation from the opening of negotiations. Even given the pandemic beginning coincidentally at the same time as negotiations opening in Mar 2020, we still waited far too long to file for mediation - like ~ a year longer than necessary. Waiting longer than is necessary to file for mediation is like waving a giant red flag, signaling to management and FH that we don’t understand the RLA and we’re afraid to use the leverage it provides.
5. The delayed SAV. Hand-in-hand with e delayed filing for mediation has come a delayed SAV, also by about a year.
6. The apparent unwillingness to shoot for anything more than, at best, industry leading narrow body contractual features. And from what I’ve heard, we’re not even truly aiming for that. Don’t know if that’s true, but regardless the failure to shoot for a true industry leading contract, period, I believe, stems from a deep lack of understanding of the RLA’s requirement to “exert every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements” and the duty to bargain “in good faith” that arises from that. Nothing about the RLA requires us to base our demands on what is perceived as industry standard nor narrow body nor anything else like that. The courts have repeatedly said that, essentially, whichever side has more economic leverage, as long as they show up and are open to hearing the other side’s POV, is what determines who prevails in a RLA bargaining environment. I don’t see ANY indication that SWAPA understands that. We have the leverage to demand way more than “market rates” and an industry leading narrow body contract.
7. The delayed response to the BOD rep ELITT situation. Not a huge deal in the big scheme of things, but it’s very recent and a small example of SWAPA seeming to want to bury their heads in the sand and not address something that ****ed off quite a few people. Apparently, Casey said something on FB yesterday. Maybe he has said something today. Regardless, waiting as long as he did kinda defies, at least, my comprehension. What’s concerning is the seeming allegiance to the “bro code” of the “band of brothers” that SWAPA seems to perceive itself as, over and above, something that was generating lots of anger among at least some of our pilots. Some folks have been asking about a code of ethics within SWAPA. It seems like they do have one: an unpublished bro code that demands a wagon-circling response versus being proactively upfront with the pilot group.
8. And now, the latest: the dinner with BoJo and AWatt. I found out about it via a casual mention OTOF from a BOD rep, not from any sort of official announcement before the fact. Harmless? Maybe. But, given the history around here, I’m skeptical. Also, like I said, interesting that the “A Shift” announcement came out shortly after the dinner.

Im sure I’ll think of more but that’s just kind of a stream of consciousness account of my thoughts. In short, I’m concerned.

 

You appear to be transmit only. I have already said I like your previous stuff.

But you keep criticizing the union at every turn.

Dismissing myself and others as “people like you” seems to indicate you can’t fathom anyone who disagrees with you.

What I’m saying is that the union has taken the unprecedented step of calling a Strike Authorization Vote. Yet in this moment, you are working against the Union. Alleging secret meetings, spreading conspiracy theories, and FUD about secret signals.

If there was any truth to your insinuations, then of course concerned members have every right to call the union’s actions into question.

But there is no proof, no bad actions, no nothing. When the union needs everyone to be unified against the company, you keep criticizing the union.

Let’s all work together for a successful SAV and then go from there. We need to keep working on the senior bubbas to wear lanyards, support the union, and vote YES for a strike.

We need as much leverage as possible and leverage comes through unity.


.

 

Where does Unity come from, and how is it built?

 

Rick James and five fingers talking to the face, I think.

 

It is NOT built through constantly criticizing the efforts of the union to achieve a resounding SAV yes percentage.

Are you working towards that goal? Or against it?


.