Im trying to understand really I am, the IBT came back at 3 years. So 1 year is the difference that the IBT is willing to gamble a 33% wage increase, more 401k, and profit sharing, for potentially 2 to 3 years? Whats that work out to ? 75 to 120k.... wow. The company would be better off letting us arbitrate and saving the money for the next few years, phasing out the 717's , and letting the chips fall where they may.
IBT No Show Forum
- Thread starter swamt
- Start date
I'm just curious, if Air Tran gives Southwest 4 years and southwest merges with another airline, will the other airline allow Southwest employees to keep an extra 4 years that neither they nor the Air Tran guys got?
If Air Tran lost seniority it would be easier to keep that in place in case of another merger I would think. Airline mergers can be complicated it seems.
If Air Tran lost seniority it would be easier to keep that in place in case of another merger I would think. Airline mergers can be complicated it seems.
AvTech04
Senior
That's where the yearly boost is a better benefit for he SWA mechanics because if they were to merge with another airline, they would already have yearly boost under their belts even if the other airline come in DOH. The ones who get screwed in that predicament is the AT guys that would not recieve anything but be bumped futher down the list, unless AMFA manages to get another boost in seniority for the entire membership at that time, meaning AT as well.
AvTech04
Senior
Yea, but where do you draw the line?? If AT agrees to 4 years and it gets voted down by SWA and passes by AT, what stops AMFA from coming back with even a more time offer?? It's a dirty game being played here no matter how you slice it. Especially when AT has conceded in giving seniority already but what were willing to give is not enough for you.
AvTech04
Senior
I really am starting to believe that this is nothing more than a pride issue. SWA and AMFA want to say that it was done in their terms while AT and the IBT want it done in their terms and pride is blinding us both. From speaking to a lot of people about the current situation, I think that there could be a simple solution to all of this. If SWA mechanics and AMFA were able to swallow their pride just this once and give AT the dignity to say that we are voting on something that we came up with rather than something forced upon us, it will probably roll over a lot better than it has. That simple jester from the SWA mechanics and AMFA will take a lot of tension away from this integration and make us at AT feel a lot better about giving away so much time, I you'd just let us do it on our terms.
S
Swadl
Guest
IBT came across with a 3 year boost offer. AMFA said no 4 year is our bottom. We will not go any lower than 4 years. And I agree with that. If anything comes across that is less than 4 years , then I'll be a NO vote. And of course there must be NO fences!!
S
Swadl
Guest
Oops sorry.... I didn't read further on down the line.
Yes git er done. I never understood why some people expect to get something for nothing. Thats not how life works.
First off get the terminology straight , AQUISITION. Merger is completely different.
LOFL, so your airline gets BOUGHT for a truckload of cash, and as long as we do it on your terms , you'll be ok with it! Youre a F*&^ing tool. Its 4 years no fences, take it leave it , we REALLY dont give a s#!t. I feel bad you have the reamsters representing you , I REALLY do, man up and get rid of them , or, let them make the decision for you. Honestly the company would save alot of money with arbitration, and potentially an A/B scale. Have at it hoss.
Unless you put it to a vote we will never know. And yes 3 is not enough, let me clarify it for you 4, FOUR YEARS. AMFA has nothing to gain by putting this to vote if they didnt thiknk it had a chance. That is why they wont put 3 across. AMFA has already signed the arbitration paperwork. WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU??? Its not 4 untill you agree and then 5 you tool, its 4 grow the f#@k up.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #1,063
They started out the day at 2.5 and 4 from last meeting. AMFA countered AT's 2.5 yrs with the 4 that AMFA said is thier bottom number. After talking amungst themselves, they later came back with 3 yrs. At this time he said it did get a little heated from the AT's attorney and he directed all the AT guys to walk out. After some time has past and (I bet some begging from the company for them to stay and continue talking), The AT guys were told once again that 4 was the final number for the AMFA side. It is now in the nego teams hands with AMFA's bottom number being 4, now the AT guys are suppose to respond to this at the next meeting set for 4-23-12.
I have a question for our nego cmte. if anyone knows out here, has AMFA delivered the 4 yrs as the final offer yet? If not why not? The reason I am asking is because AMFA told them that 4 yrs was the bottom number, then AMFA has countered 2 different counters from AT with the same 4 yrs. Does the AT side know or been told that this is final best and last?
I have a question for our nego cmte. if anyone knows out here, has AMFA delivered the 4 yrs as the final offer yet? If not why not? The reason I am asking is because AMFA told them that 4 yrs was the bottom number, then AMFA has countered 2 different counters from AT with the same 4 yrs. Does the AT side know or been told that this is final best and last?
The problem is that it is harder to get 51% of 1700 to swallow than it is to get 51% of 350 to swallow.
Also throw in the fact that the 1700 get nothing out of the deal and the 350 get big raises is store if they can swallow.
The simple and easier path is clear.
The Airtran guys swallow the pride, take the raises and are welcomed aboard.
You won't get even close to 51% of Swa guys to vote for less than 4 years with the perceived inequality of pay increases and benefits.
We just won't do it.
Not trying to piss you off, just telling you how our guys see it.
It is what it is.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
As an outsider following this integration issue on several boards, I'm honestly wondering how much SWA mechanics are willing to negotiate to secure the often cited 4 years.
Depending on which board/day you're reading, the willingness of the SWA mechanics to accept the 4 years themselves more often than not seems to fall into question.
So a question.
If the AirTran mechanics came back to the table and agreed to the 4 years/no fences, but with this condition:
If the AirTran mechanics voted to accept the 4 year deal, and the SWA mechanics voted to reject it, then what ever the ensuing arbitration produced as far as SLI, would be immediately binding on both, WITHOUT the need of an immediate JCBA.
This would give the SWA mechanics their bottom line, and give the AirTran mechanics the assurance that they would not have to keep negotiating against themselves in the event of a SWA rejection.
BTW I understand the arbitration process is running parallel to these negotiations, what happens if nothing comes out of the 23rd meeting?
Depending on which board/day you're reading, the willingness of the SWA mechanics to accept the 4 years themselves more often than not seems to fall into question.
So a question.
If the AirTran mechanics came back to the table and agreed to the 4 years/no fences, but with this condition:
If the AirTran mechanics voted to accept the 4 year deal, and the SWA mechanics voted to reject it, then what ever the ensuing arbitration produced as far as SLI, would be immediately binding on both, WITHOUT the need of an immediate JCBA.
This would give the SWA mechanics their bottom line, and give the AirTran mechanics the assurance that they would not have to keep negotiating against themselves in the event of a SWA rejection.
BTW I understand the arbitration process is running parallel to these negotiations, what happens if nothing comes out of the 23rd meeting?
Similar threads
