Originally Posted by Traffic Alert

SWA pilots are acting just as bad as the FA’s. Never heard of anything this bad at the big 3 during negotiations. They are rumors off a message board. Go enjoy life and wait for the real thing.

and yes.. rates are just rates. Those who choose to attach them to someone are just looking for an irrelevant comparison to justify an opinion.

if CA can’t be happy w/ industry leading pay and are willing to delay a contract over $7/hr TOS, then we are just like the FA. Don’t let a fragile ego get in the way of a good thing.


and yes.. the nmb would ice us if we did so and there would be no strike leverage to fall back on.

Originally Posted by RJSAviator76

I really think our main obstacle isn't the mediator, or the company.... it's us. It's downright pathetic watching pilots cut themselves from underneath. Look no further than Delta's board and their AIP thread. They're not happy with the retro, the raises, or even implementation but they're throwing in the towel because the mediator scared them. Note a number of them saying how they have no leverage... today... and they're saying that because in their minds, the mediator scared them into believing this is all they can get because apparently mediator told the company to give their best offer forward, and now all of a sudden, these poor souls think they have no leverage. Why does the word "blarney" come to mind??

I have a good friend at Delta who's a captain and he's happy with the AIP and plans on voting yes. I tried to point out a few things to him, but good luck... He just sees the $65k or so he stands to get in retro.

Then spoke with another buddy of mine who's a Spirit captain. I asked him "WTF... I thought you guys were all about "Discount Fares, not Discount Pilots." He's happy with their AIP. Mind blown....

Alaska... look at the percentage of their yes voters.

Once in a generation opportunity, and this profession chokes. I don't have much faith in this profession or pilots in general.... what a bunch of pathetic, low self-esteem individuals...

Originally Posted by mulcher

Funny thing is. When many were hired they made more than WB pay.

Originally Posted by FleetSnarl

How long can the NMB put us on ice? Can the NMB be taken at its word if they tell us they're going to keep us on ice for such-and-such period of time? Does the NMB use pressure tactics?

Suggest you read this post from last year that goes into detail explaining the fallacy behind your statement regarding being iced and then having "no strike leverage to fall back on." https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/3544575-post1.html PS, I think Lew said sometime later that average time in mediation right now is around 700 days.

And found this post from RJS while searching for the above info:

Originally Posted by Caveman

This is literally like looking at a release that has a dispatcher saying your career worth is landing with 4.8 at destination.

95% of our guys don't buy it, and demand more gas.

Why career value and professional self worth are viewed differently....now the pilot group as a whole caves and tries to find a way to convince themselves landing with 4.6 is OK

Just say NO (for once), not good enough, I need more career value.

Look at the whole release. Sure. But landing with less than X generates auto NO.

What's so hard about this? 99% SAV. Can't fill classes. 300+ leaving in a year. RLA play clock ticking. 6 years of trip pull by NC.

If now isn't the time, it'll never be.

Originally Posted by boldblue

your quoted post from back when Delta AIP'd was intresting and I do think they sold them, and us short... but here is a real problem we do have... many here wanted to go LAST because in our minds we could get the best deal... perhaps thats true but knowing what all the others settled for makes it very difficult to demand a contract that is miles apart from the rest, the company and the NMB would argue it would cause a huge cost disadvantage (whether thats true or not doesn't matter) vs all the competition that couldn't be adjusted until all the competitors have to renegotiate and sign which is 5-7 years (accounting for the usual stall tactics) away... the time to have reset the bar was when the FIRST of the big 4 to signed a new contract, and that was Delta... they just set the bar too low and now the industry pays a price.

Originally Posted by Lewbronski

It is clear in the cases we have examined that the courts in RLA cases steer entirely clear of sizing up the merits of the proposal in a dispute as to their reasonableness or lack thereof, as to whether or not they’re affordable, and as to whether or not they comply with one side’s conception of industry standard. In the 1943 US Supreme Court case Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis V. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Justice Jackson, speaking for the court’s majority, wrote:

"The Railway Labor Act, like the National Labor Relations Act, does not undertake governmental regulation of wages, hours, or working conditions. Instead it seeks to provide a means by which agreement may be reached with respect to them. The national interest expressed by those Acts is not primarily in the working conditions as such. So far as the Act itself is concerned these conditions may be as bad as the employees will tolerate or be made as good as they can bargain for. The Act does not fix and does not authorize anyone to fix generally applicable standards for working conditions. [43]"

Said succinctly in a later 1952 Supreme Court case regarding good faith bargaining, the federal government “may not, either directly or indirectly, compel concessions or otherwise sit in judgment upon the substantive terms of collective bargaining agreements.” [44] Instead, “as the Supreme Court acknowledged, speaking through Justice Black, the labor laws allow economic strength ultimately to control the establishment of contract terms, regardless of which side may have better reasons for its position … It is ‘permissible for a party to engage in `hard bargaining,' utilizing its economic power to its advantage to retain as many rights as possible’ subject only to necessity that there be a subjective ‘desire to reach ultimate agreement.’” [45]

In fact, bad faith determinations are limited to whether the parties to a dispute have “exerted every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements.” Have they shown up? Have they demonstrated an openness to listening to the other side? Have they demonstrated a desire to come to an agreement versus just going through the motions?

Making a reasonable argument that Southwest Airlines pilots ought to have career compensation, benefits, and work rules equal to or better than wide body airline pilots at The Big Three, FedEx, or UPS does not violate good faith bargaining nor the reasonability clause of the RLA. The idea that we must limit ourselves to an outdated notion that SWA pilots and our families are confined to a sort airline industry B-scale way of life is not required by the RLA nor federal labor law policy. The only reason we believe our negotiating posture must be hog-tied by the limits of what is considered “industry standard” for narrow body pilots is our own mythology and embracement of “the big lie.”

[43] Terminal Railroad Assn. of St. Louis v. Trainmen, 318 US 1, No. No. 218 (Supreme Court 1943).
[44] Labor Board v. American Ins. Co, 343.
[45] Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. TWA, 682.

Originally Posted by Liberty

Definitely miss Lew. Bizarre mystery that he’s able to keep quiet. Looking at the leaked numbers which a BOD member seems to be INDIRECTLY IMPLYING that those numbers MIGHT be accurate on TOF. If so, definitely doesn’t seem like Lew is involved in any influential capacity with swapa, which was once suggested. I’m guessing, he died. I mean, really, what the heck happened?

Originally Posted by Liberty

Definitely miss Lew. Bizarre mystery that he’s able to keep quiet. Looking at the leaked numbers which a BOD member seems to be INDIRECTLY IMPLYING that those numbers MIGHT be accurate on TOF. If so, definitely doesn’t seem like Lew is involved in any influential capacity with swapa, which was once suggested. I’m guessing, he died. I mean, really, what the heck happened?

Originally Posted by FAR121

Wonder if the company is gonna lower the pay scales due to now having a 140 MILLION dollar fine coming their way.

Originally Posted by boldblue

well the NMB has suggested breaks from negotiations of upwards of 6 months in the past, but often come back to the table with the parties sooner. when on ice you absolutely CAN continue negotiations without them if both parties are interested, and lets be clear... a failure of a TA here at SWA would cause an exodus of FOs that make what happened in 2023 pale in comparison and good luck getting anyone to come... so I think there would still be a strong drive for parties to continue to negotiate even if "on ice."

your quoted post from back when Delta AIP'd was intresting and I do think they sold them, and us short... but here is a real problem we do have... many here wanted to go LAST because in our minds we could get the best deal... perhaps thats true but knowing what all the others settled for makes it very difficult to demand a contract that is miles apart from the rest, the company and the NMB would argue it would cause a huge cost disadvantage (whether thats true or not doesn't matter) vs all the competition that couldn't be adjusted until all the competitors have to renegotiate and sign which is 5-7 years (accounting for the usual stall tactics) away... the time to have reset the bar was when the FIRST of the big 4 to signed a new contract, and that was Delta... they just set the bar too low and now the industry pays a price.