The rigs are the key, and there has been no mention of them from the NC.

Consider a 6 hr min day:

Even at our ridiculous 95 hour max month is still 15 days off, the 4 days off would take care of themselves.

Tired of doing a 7 hour turn out of someone else's base for 4.5 hours credit? Not any more. Trip averaging pretty much gone.

Would probably reduce some of that airport appreciation time also, since they need to keep you moving during more of your available FDP. Less time available to play information desk attendant in the terminal.

 

For the love of God do not allow pbs.... We had guys doing 16-18 days in a row last Xmas going through New Years. I can't verify it, but one guy said 23 days in a row.

Put those QOL items in a box and lock it up and toss the key. Once gone they're gone forever. Do not let them have your QOL!

Just my opinion

 

If you don't know what southwest has how do you know what should or can be negotiated? Education is key. So many guys here have no idea what the other carriers' contracts look like.

You say scope and ltd are important but 4 days and transition are your sticking point. If you lose your medical or your job gets outsourced because of week scope then the items you mentioned don't mean shiit because you'll have 31 days off a month.

Transition is a joke btw. I'm senior enough to get it every month but have to bid lines I don't want to get it and then pick up over top of it to get my pay up. You also end up working the first and last week of every month. I'm not saying give it away but for industry leading pay, retirement, scope, and ltd I'd kiss it goodbye and never look back. I sure wouldn't sell it for less though.

 

Spot On!....

 

SWA isn't quite the same as all the other majors, you should know that. I wouldn't want any part of SWA, if I did, I'd apply there. Even so, you're right about the contract studying part. The union sent out a comparison if you remember. Scope? Important, but no more important than anything else. Delta, United, American, even JetBlue, have given up some form of scope, their pilots are still employed and are well paid. I'm NOT advocating giving up scope. Far from it. And LTD, important, yes, but it DOESNT affect every single pilot like pay, retirement, and our important qol rules do. I ain't saying LTD doesn't need improvement, but no improvement to scope or LTD isn't going to necessarily make me vote no, no improvement to pay & retirment or loss of our qol rules will. Think about it, if the only improvements to our next contract was scope and LTD would you vote yes? I doubt it. Vote NO? I bet you would. If the only changes to the contract were in pay & retirement, everything else remaining the same, what would your vote be?

 

I've said before without massive improvements in both scope and ltd I will vote no. Period.

You say every other airline has given scope and they are still employed which is true but how has their career progression been affected by those scope gives? Massively is the answer and there is a huge dollar amount to that and many were furloughed when they otherwise wouldn't have been even when havoc hit the industry. I'm not saying our jobs will be taken over by rjs but I have given multiple scenarios of how our non existent codeshare language could effectively kill seniority progression for spirit pilots. Your progression is based on growth not retirements and if that growth stops so do you. If they can (one day) grow profitably through codeshare they will and not only will all seniority progression stop but you then have little leverage to negotiate better compensation because they effectively don't need you and you only exist in stagnated limbo because of our current no furlough codesharing clause.

Why do you think southwest management is looking for a major codeshare give in their scope? It's too important to ignore.

Hey, ignorance is bliss and I can't tell the future but insuring against it could prove to be priceless one day.

Please, feel free to continue your blissful journey. You've been warned.

 

Again, SPOT ON!

 

I'm not continuing a blissfully ignorant journey. But, I ask again, if the only improvements to a TA are in scope and LTD, are you going to vote yes or no? Scope and LTD are important, don't think I believe they can be tossed aside. But, if scope and ltd stayed the same in this next contract, it's not an automatic no vote from me, we've done just fine over the last five years with things as they are scope wise. I understand that could change, I understand that management COULD change things, but so far that hasn't happened. Im not gonna stand for saying my head is in the sand either, I know what could happen. But, I am saying a change to PBS or a loss of our four day's off would generate an automatic NO! Transition conflict, as long as it doesn't violate the four day off rule, I'll await judgement to see what is offered.

 

So, if the only improvements to this contract are to scope and ltd you're a yes vote? The two of you putzin and quatsopilot. That's what you guys seem to be saying.

 

Is scope one of the core sections covered by the focused negotiations? I didnt think it was. You might be setting a high bar.