The furlough lasted a little more than 5 months and was (again) union and market related. The fuel spiked in 2008 (as we all know), AirTran was under new management (Our buddy, Bob Fornaro), and we cancelled flights over the holidays due to the furlough. The furlough was done out of economic conditions, but mostly out of spite. We were in negotiations at the time, and Klaus Goersch (familiar name? - you've now married him too), and Steve Kolski, the company lawyer (A Lorenzo pupil), threatened to fire everyone on probation at the time. The union gave way, and the probationary pilots were, instead, furloughed. There were 169 furloughed pilots. The furloughee's were furloughed in September of 2008, and recalls began in January of 2009. Most Furloughee's returned within a 6 month time-frame, and the others took jobs elsewhere until they could meet their obligations to return. Else, they didn't return at all. It was a lesson to both management and the NPA (our union at the time).

The upgrade time for an AirTran pilot in 2007 was 5 years. It is now just under 7 years time (by seniority).

Southwest upgrades are 9+ years time. -So what you are saying is that the SWA upgrades should become AirTran 6+ and The Airtran upgrades should become 11+ ???

This does play into an Arbitrator's decision. However, an Arbitrator will also look at the date of the proposed merger (September 27th, 2010).

How were both airlines doing at the time? What was the upgrade time? What were the respective pilot groups expectations? Was one of the airlines defunct? How many aircraft did they have on order? Were those orders made to replace and retire existing aircraft?

Will the Captain's be downgraded to FO? (-possibly the junior AirTran Captain's, and especially the ones awarded Captain after the announcement).

However, case in point --- In 1967. Pacific Airlines, West Coast Airlines, and Bonanza Air Lines merged. In this event, the Arbitrator awarded Captain seats on a ONE-FOR-ONE basis. One Pacific Captain, to One West Coast Captain, to One Bonanza Captain. Many of the the pilots at those airlines would criticize the other airline, saying that THEY would be the ones to be stapled. History has an odd way of repeating itself.

After reviewing Arbitration awards (certainly not recent arbitration, but Arbitrators don't deviate much when the merger has similar aircraft types and both airlines are healthy), I've noted that Arbitrators almost ALWAYS protect the Captain.

SO if the Arbitrator staples the remainder of the AirTran First Officers (not likely) - so what. They were going to be stapled under the SWAPA proposal at any rate.

Who will really lose out if this becomes the case? The same Southwest Pilots that have elected Steve Chase, and his New Radicals.

"NO SOUTHWEST PILOT SHALL BE HARMED". Really?!? (*cough* *cough*).

So SWAPA pilots being harmed is okay? Rodney, I sincerely hope that opinion is in the minority over there. On a different note.....SC and his merry gang got elected in to make sure we got a strong section 1 in our last contract(and to move it along). We got that!

*cough* *cough* LIE!

It has never been my intent to see any harm come to SWA pilots, but then again, I never made that statement. Did the current SWAPA leadership actually consider that statement might be false, were this to result in Arbitration?

I'm saying that through their zeal, and if this goes to Arbitration- you have been lied to.

Then again, it all depends on what we consider as being 'Harmed'?

What do you consider as harm?

I'd certainly say that a staple of 600+ AirTran FO's as, 'a career setback'. Harm? Maybe...

"Mr Arbitrator, with regard to career expectations, we refer you to SWAPA Exhibit 1:"

Number of Airtran pilots with active applications in at other airlines = @ 62%

Number of SWA pilots with active applications in at other airlines = @ 0.1%

Great stats 4th! You should post where you got those stats from, and how recent they are (if they're even valid).

Myself, I don't have any other applications on file (and before you write it), nor should I need to.

We're going to be integrated and all will be well. It won't be a landslide in either groups favor, and if it is, we'll both be lucky to be working at the bottom of Allegiant's list after they buy up the scraps of an airline once referred to as Southwest.

Fair and equitable? Is it possible?

Everyone seems to be propagating the idea that SWA and GK can PROFITABLY keep operations separate and gradually liquidate/integrate AT's routes and planes without running afoul of Federal law. One of the reasons merger/acquisitions occur is because there are savings/synergies (I believe DAL/NWA is on the order of Billions already) to be achieved. If this merger/acquisition becomes contentious (see US Air/America West) then that will be quickly lost. So, SWAPA counting on GK favoring SWAPA may be a little presumptuous - JMHO.

Is it true that the ALPA attorneys recommended sending the AIP out for a vote?

That's a huge mystery over here.

If you ask the MEC reps that question directly, they just say the lawyer explained every option but didn't recommend any one in particular.

If you ask the Merger Committee members, they all say the attorney's recommend we send the proposal to a vote.

Huh, Midwest Airlines.

If you think it can't be done, you live in a fantasy land.

Profitably? Do you mean that they would have to invest in themselves to do it? Then yes, but what would the 5 year proposition be?