SWA Pilots Reject TA

little_cricket

Well-Known Member
Turn out 95.9percent (5649) out of 5890 eligible voters.


Accept = 49.16 percent, 2774 members
Reject = 50.84 percent, 2869 members


FO's vote NO 61% to 39%

CA's vote YES 60% to 40%
 
Well. . .good on them.

When negotiating, you never take the first offer on that car purchase now do you?
 
...Good for them, I was worried about SWA since this TA was said to have provisions in it for contract regional lift.

Scope please!
 
Well. . .good on them.

When negotiating, you never take the first offer on that car purchase now do you?

I disagree with your reasoning, but agree that it was the right decision to vote NO. This agreement contained significant scheduling concessions and no restrictions on outsourced international flying, plus it allowed domestic RJ outsourcing in the event that SWA merges with a carrier that already outsources RJ lift. Bad deal. SWAPA needs to wake up.
 
I disagree with your reasoning, but agree that it was the right decision to vote NO. This agreement contained significant scheduling concessions and no restrictions on outsourced international flying, plus it allowed domestic RJ outsourcing in the event that SWA merges with a carrier that already outsources RJ lift. Bad deal. SWAPA needs to wake up.

It's good that they shot it down, but bad that it was only by 1%. You're right on with the scope issue--they need to get that taken care of. I had an interesting jumpseat a few weeks ago with 4 of us up front (a southwest js'er as well as me) and they had slightly differing views on it. What was a little scary, though, was that the 20-yr CA didn't care a bit about scope. His logic was that the company was going to outsource if they wanted to no matter what the contract said.
 
It's good that they shot it down, but bad that it was only by 1%. You're right on with the scope issue--they need to get that taken care of. I had an interesting jumpseat a few weeks ago with 4 of us up front (a southwest js'er as well as me) and they had slightly differing views on it. What was a little scary, though, was that the 20-yr CA didn't care a bit about scope. His logic was that the company was going to outsource if they wanted to no matter what the contract said.

I was riding in the jumpseat a while back where the Captain said that it's best not fight management much when negotiation time comes. He was sort of saying not to bite the hand that feeds them. I think that there needs to be an understanding that SWA will eventually change and that it's up to the work force to keep love in LUV. Management has been good to them in the past, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't flip on them!

I'd love to have an opportunity to work at yesterdays and todays( sort of)
sometime in the future.
 
I disagree with your reasoning, but agree that it was the right decision to vote NO. This agreement contained significant scheduling concessions and no restrictions on outsourced international flying, plus it allowed domestic RJ outsourcing in the event that SWA merges with a carrier that already outsources RJ lift. Bad deal. SWAPA needs to wake up.

Well Todd, that's wonderful. Considering I didn't provide any reasoning. ;)
 
I was riding in the jumpseat a while back where the Captain said that it's best not fight management much when negotiation time comes. He was sort of saying not to bite the hand that feeds them. I think that there needs to be an understanding that SWA will eventually change and that it's up to the work force to keep love in LUV. Management has been good to them in the past, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't flip on them!

I'd love to have an opportunity to work at yesterdays and todays( sort of)
sometime in the future.

In the past, with Herb running the show, I think you COULD rely on management to do the right thing. It seems the new management at SWA is just another group of standard airline management people. I'm a big fan of SWA, and I'd love to work there someday, too. BUT, I'm actually a little concerned about the direction they seem to be steering the company.
 
In the past, with Herb running the show, I think you COULD rely on management to do the right thing. It seems the new management at SWA is just another group of standard airline management people. I'm a big fan of SWA, and I'd love to work there someday, too. BUT, I'm actually a little concerned about the direction they seem to be steering the company.

I miss Herb.
 
Maybe I misinterpreted, but it seemed that you were saying that the TA should have been rejected simply because it was the first one, and you should always reject the first offer.

That's how I read it too.

As for SWA, it's not wonder the FO's voted NO, they are the ones that will lose their job first when they start outsourcing. I guess even the SWA pilot group hasn't learned a thing from the last decade.
 
Maybe I misinterpreted, but it seemed that you were saying that the TA should have been rejected simply because it was the first one, and you should always reject the first offer.

Two things.

I don't think it was rejected because it was the first TA. You hinted as to why it was really rejected. But, it was wise of them to reject it because it was the first TA, who knows what other negotiation could bring.
 
Two things.

I don't think it was rejected because it was the first TA. You hinted as to why it was really rejected. But, it was wise of them to reject it because it was the first TA, who knows what other negotiation could bring.

That's not wise strategy in many cases. Circumstances can quickly change, and the TA you were first offered might suddenly become unattainable just a few weeks later. What looked like a pretty decent, but not great, deal could easily become much more than you can achieve later due to economic conditions and other outside factors. Turning down a deal simply because it's the first one might backfire horribly. Better to just examine the deal on its own merits and determine whether it's worthy of your consideration. The ALA deal was a great example. Was it perfect? No, no deal is. But it was pretty damned good, and turning it down likely would have resulted in 2+ years of further negotiations that probably wouldn't have gotten them much more, if anything.
 
I understand the threat of outsourced RJ flying in the event of a merge, but what is wrong with international code shares?
 
I understand the threat of outsourced RJ flying in the event of a merge, but what is wrong with international code shares?

SWA has very little room left domestically to grow. The vast majority of their growth will have to come from the international market. If SWAPA allows SWA to continue outsourcing international flying to carriers like Westjet, then the SWAPA pilots will never get any benefits from the growth.
 
That's how I read it too.

As for SWA, it's not wonder the FO's voted NO, they are the ones that will lose their job first when they start outsourcing. I guess even the SWA pilot group hasn't learned a thing from the last decade.

You'll also notice how most of the captains were in favor of the TA. Throw em a couple of bucks and they will continue to sell their brothers out. More pulling up of the ladder.
 
If they felt it didn't pass muster, it didn't pass muster and I'm glad they turned it down.

There are a few too many in my own pilot group that will see a TA that looks and smells like used toilet paper after a bathroom visit after a bad bowl of salmonella chili, pinch their nose, sprinkle lime over it, spray it with Ozium, vote it in and THEN spend the next five years bitching about how terrible it is.

Godspeed, SWA. We're all going to need someone to attempt to springboard off of.
 
a TA that looks and smells like used toilet paper after a bathroom visit after a bad bowl of salmonella chili, pinch their nose, sprinkle lime over it, spray it with Ozium, vote it in and THEN spend the next five years bitching about how terrible it is.

What, pray tell, created this metaphor in your mind??? :D
 
Back
Top