SW/Airtran Seniority

[buscador]

You may not get a response. After all the early bravado of what they would and would not accept, when their MEC refused to put the company's offer out for a vote, and the company took all the money and the fences, etc. off the table, it's been rather quiet from the AT side.

I would have to agree with you, I have been watching different boards. I understand that the FL pilots who have been burned before by poor management would go after the most they can get,, we all would.. but the demands and arrogance and insults seemed to be the wrong approach. All the venom they used,,The name calling, the terms like land grab, abortion on paper, calling the swa pilots names.... bad approach... The arrogance and self entitlement seems to permiate through their messages.

Now all the quiet I hear can be attributed to ,,,the fact that all the big talk was just that,,they missed the point that this is a serious company that doesnt plays games,, offered a deal that.. be it fair or not fair was expected to be LOOKED at,, not shunned.. that shunning will be talked about for many years/carreers to come,, how could you just let 8 guys shun swa...shun 1700

FL people keep screaming arrogance, culture, etc.. but many would say that they missed the point.. look at the deal offered and humor the management that will one day be YOUR management.. and VOTE.

If you choose not to decide,, You still have made a choice,, or if you choose not to Vote you still have made a Vote,,
this will be the biggest NON vote in the careers of so many.....and the ripples will be felt all the way through the 8000 good employees at FL...8 arrogant guys sending a ripple to 8000,, you want to talk about unfair!!!!

Now it is time to see what happens, and all the pontificators and zealots can crawl back inside their holes and wonder where it went wrong.. unfortunately it has come to this,,, above all ..we are all humans with families and friends and I hope that we all wish well upon others ,, the "Omnipotent 8" changed the course of the lives/careers of so many good people,, that is the true travesty of this whole thing...

Good luck to all involved

 

[jimntx]

When the whole group votes is when you see what the Pilot group thinks. If they vote it down (which they should in my opinion ) then it goes to arbitration.In the long run that is the best. I have been on both sides of seniority list intergrations only one is fair to BOTH sides . Short term pay raises will never pay for a career of bitterness.

I have no idea what you mean by "short term pay raises." Do you think that Southwest would give you a 40% raise and the take it back at some point? Southwest doesn't work that way. If you don't know that, you must think that AT is the center of the airline universe and there is no need for you to learn anything about any other airline. I am an AA employee, but I know quite a bit about Southwest--particularly in the area of how they treat their employees and the answer to that is VERY WELL. How good will your seniority be for you if Southwest management decides to "AirCal/Reno/TWA" the AT side of the operation? I.E., keep the a/c they want, eliminate the employees and the stations, or restaff them with Southwest employees. This has nothing to do with McCaskill-Bond (or Bond-McCaskill, I can never remember). M-B addresses union actions in mergers. I don't think it requires any company to keep employees they don't need.

 

[jimntx]

I think it was the last Morris Air guy and I have no idea what that means!!!

NICDOA
NPJB

Try Google sometime. Morris Air started as a charter airline in 1984. Got it's FAR121 certificate in December, 1992. Was sold to Southwest in December, 1993. Was merged totally into Southwest by June, 1994. Now, let's review...Valuejet started business in 1992. Are you saying that any AT pilot that was around then should go ahead of a WN pilot that started with Morris Air prior to 1992? Then, I'm sure that you won't mind when Southwest buys another airline that started in 1995, and it is decided to put that airline's #1 pilot ahead of the #1 AT pilot. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Turn about's fair play. And, all that.

 

[num1bearsfan]

I have no idea what you mean by "short term pay raises." Do you think that Southwest would give you a 40% raise and the take it back at some point? Southwest doesn't work that way. If you don't know that, you must think that AT is the center of the airline universe and there is no need for you to learn anything about any other airline. I am an AA employee, but I know quite a bit about Southwest--particularly in the area of how they treat their employees and the answer to that is VERY WELL. How good will your seniority be for you if Southwest management decides to "AirCal/Reno/TWA" the AT side of the operation? I.E., keep the a/c they want, eliminate the employees and the stations, or restaff them with Southwest employees. This has nothing to do with McCaskill-Bond (or Bond-McCaskill, I can never remember). M-B addresses union actions in mergers. I don't think it requires any company to keep employees they don't need.

That is correct. The MB law dictates that integrations be done in a fair and equitable fashion. It doesn't state that one must take place to begin with.

IMO, this confirmed what a lot of Southwest people suspected might happen. The AirTran people really don't buy into our culture and they're approaching this integration as if they were being acquired by another AirTran like entity with hardened attitudes. In a way I can relate because I have not always been an employee of Southwest and I know what it's like to work in an adversarial (company vs rank and file) environment for many years. You do sort of develop a callus on your soul and you always carry a bit of mistrust. It must be a very foreign idea that a company that believes in high employee morale and fair treatment wants to take you over. On the other hand, Southwest's management is probably feeling the sting of the backlash from a disgruntled work group that they had no part in creating and is starting to rethink some things. There's no doubt that Southwest did NOT expect the first agreement to get slapped down in defiant fashion like it was. They're not used to doing business like that.

 

[metopower]

I have no idea what you mean by "short term pay raises." Do you think that Southwest would give you a 40% raise and the take it back at some point? Southwest doesn't work that way. If you don't know that, you must think that AT is the center of the airline universe and there is no need for you to learn anything about any other airline. I am an AA employee, but I know quite a bit about Southwest--particularly in the area of how they treat their employees and the answer to that is VERY WELL. How good will your seniority be for you if Southwest management decides to "AirCal/Reno/TWA" the AT side of the operation? I.E., keep the a/c they want, eliminate the employees and the stations, or restaff them with Southwest employees. This has nothing to do with McCaskill-Bond (or Bond-McCaskill, I can never remember). M-B addresses union actions in mergers. I don't think it requires any company to keep employees they don't need.

What "I" mean by short term pay raise is just that . 40 % or 50 % or what ever the number is just that. Eventually those employees will become SWA employees at SWA pay rates. So if you do the math you will see that by taking the early pay increase and sacrifice your seniority in the long run you will take a MAJOR paycut.Only TWA applys to your example. That is because it is an LCC corp.under AMR. The others were merged into AMR under unfavorable terms. Reno and AirCal were both done by date of hire which was very favorable to AMR .TWA was basically a staple job. That is how you got the McCaskill-Bond Law. SWA can do what they wish with the AT assets but the still have to address the seniority of the people that remain from the "merger"

 

[jimntx]

SWA can do what they wish with the AT assets but the still have to address the seniority of the people that remain from the "merger"

Only if SWA decides to keep you. Nothing in McCaskill-Bond requires any company to keep employees they don't need. M-B is not directed at the companies, it is directed at the unions predominately. The unions have to address the seniority, but (once again) only if the incoming people are retained. Good luck. And, don't make the mistake that some have made in the past and think that SWA can't do without you. They can. Everybody wants to work for SWA. Well, everybody but you apparently.

SWA even treats applicants equally. Anyone can go online to the SWA website and apply for any job in the company. Applications are processed in date order. When I was furloughed from AA in July, 2003, I sat down on July 3, 2003 and entered a job application with SWA. I was recalled to AA in November, 2004. SWA contacted me for an interview in December, 2004. It took 18 months for my app to bubble to the top of the list. It is STILL that way with their applications.

 

[IORFA]

Little correction about Reno Air. Reno was bought in Dec 1998. They were given seniority dates of Aug 31, 1999. They were not given a seniority date until ALL F/A's had completed transition training. In the mean time any person hired to be a F/A and completed training before Aug 31, 1999 was then senior to all Reno F/A's. So the Reno F/A's were "stapled" as well, even got a worse deal than TWA F/A's. Little tid bit about the TWA training. I wish I had a picture of the signs at the ol' Flagship University. One was the big FU sign hanging down from the ceiling in the lobby. Since changed to FSU. You know Flagship is now 2 words. The other was the T.W.A.T.T. sign next to the FU sign. Classic! Can't make it up. Trans World Airlines Transitional Training. Awesome. T.W.A.T.T. at the ol' FU! How someone was dumb enough to actually make those signs and better yet actually hang them is beyond me. Actually the Facilities Maintenance personnel from the TWU probably had a great laugh while hanging them. Mind you they didn't last long. Too bad.

 

[metopower]

Little correction about Reno Air. Reno was bought in Dec 1998. They were given seniority dates of Aug 31, 1999. They were not given a seniority date until ALL F/A's had completed transition training. In the mean time any person hired to be a F/A and completed training before Aug 31, 1999 was then senior to all Reno F/A's. So the Reno F/A's were "stapled" as well, even got a worse deal than TWA F/A's.

I only know about the pilot side .AA has always been more then fair ....Not.

 

[citrus jock]

I've only been quiet Jim, because the last time I tried to explain to you how I'd rather have better seniority than a pay raise, you implied that there's no way I could possibly, in my right mind, want that. Just sittin here, quietly, still in my "wrong" mind.

 

[Kev3188]

When the whole group votes is when you see what the Pilot group thinks. If they vote it down (which they should in my opinion ) then it goes to arbitration.In the long run that is the best. I have been on both sides of seniority list intergrations only one is fair to BOTH sides . Short term pay raises will never pay for a career of bitterness.

Do you think the proportion method used with NW/DL for you guys was fair? What's the general consensus of those you've run into on the line? Just curious...

 

[metopower]

Do you think the proportion method used with NW/DL for you guys was fair? What's the general consensus of those you've run into on the line? Just curious...

Yes is the short answer. Reasons are many but mostly because it went the whole course. Both sides present there case before 3 judges and THEY created a formula for settlement. With DL and WAL the proses was settled by management wanting a quick and quiet fix. So they threatened both sides and PRESENTED a formula that was accepted by both sides. Hindsight caused years of resentment and lost wages for one side (and it is usually not the larger or acquiring side).Most guys that I have talked to are satisfied with the result though not perfect. There are some areas of the list that are not as smooth as the could have been. Top was basically date of hire so was the bottom but in the middle portions is were the problems can to light. Hurt both sides because the hiring at the time was out of step with each other. The freeze on equipment is short and only effects a small part of the list and it is short. So I vote fair on our list. How about yours?

 

[Kev3188]

Ours has yet to be decided.

PMDL uses straight date of hire, while PMNW uses classification seniority. The company has stated that should the contested elections fail, DOH will be the way forward. I prefer classification seniority, but I'm in the minority, I think. My biggest concern w/it is how they will integrate Crew Chiefs (ALA's in the DL parlance). So far, they've only offered vague outlines on that will occur. As it stands, my spot in line wouldn't change one way or the other under either method.

BTW, the DL seniority committee originally proposed a method similar to yours for several cities, with the intention of transitioning to straight DOH after a period of 2-3 years. After getting feedback from their station visits, that's now off the table.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Both you two, Kev and Meto, show that even though it is impossible to please everyone but there is a middle ground for all that doesn't require one side being disadvantaged at the expense of the other... I still think history will look kinder on the DL/NW merger and the success DL has had in trying to be fair than what will be seen in any of the other airline mergers since 2000.
.
DL and NW had an advantage in that they were pretty comparable in alot of ways before the merger... employee average compensation and seniority was very similar, networks were complementary and DL had every intention of incorporating the vast majority of NW's system into its own (it wasn't interested in plucking out of a few choice assets), and had similar work rules, scope etc. Further, DL set the tone for the merger from an employee perspective by getting agreement from the pilots beforehand - and being willing to throw money at the employees to make them happy.
DL clearly cut some capacity in MEM but they did so in CVG as well; they outsourced some functions that were done inhouse previously but they also brought some work back to DL people.
.
You two are both testaments to why the merger is working... no one got everything they wanted but no group has been so upset that they have taken it out on the company and the operation. And both sides have integrated well and done their jobs as good as if not better than they did before.
.
Hopefully the representation issues will be resolved soon and all DL emplohyees in the same category will enjoy the same pay and benefits.
.
I suspect there will be people at FL looking across the ramp at DL and wishing their experience was going as well.

 

[IORFA]

I only know about the pilot side .AA has always been more then fair ....Not.

I can't remember what happened to the Reno pilots, but TWA did NOT get stapled. Yes most did, but definitely not all. Was it fair? I guess that depends on who you ask. Those TWA pilots close to retirement were treated more than fair. A lot of AA pilots didn't like the agreement as well, so I guess since nobody was happy, it was a success.

 

[johnny kat]

I'm just curious...What happened to the assets and employees of ATA? Was that a merger of sorts or a liquidation of ATA? I chatted with a former ATA employee and was told that SWA slowly took over the gates and added flights on SW jets and then started laying off all the ATA employees. I noticed Southwest is starting separate service in Atlanta in a few months.