SWA, FL FA agree on SENIORITY

[NYCDelta]

I don't know enough about the mechanic's situation to make even a semi-informed guess. All I can say is that a negotiated method of integration is better than going to an arbitration and that Kelly has the power to prevent an arbitration by operating WN and FL separately, although separate ops is a less desirable outcome as the number of employees in the affected groups gets smaller.

As for the 5-10 years extra seniority for WN FA's, that's not my assumption but merely an observation that some WN FA's could feel that way. As I've said before, from my perspective as an outsider it seems the worst deal for WN FA's would be a straight ratio integration. DOH would be better, expecially for WN FA's hired before FL started operations in early 1994. This is better for more WN FA's since it means no FL FA's will go above any WN FA hired before midish 1996 and every FL FA would be lower than they would be based on their DOH. What would be the perfect amount of longevity to add to WN FA's? Depends on who you ask - some near the bottom of the WN list might want all the FL FA's placed below themselves, which would require 15 or more years be added to their hire date and effectively be stapling. Others near the top of the WN list might say straight DOH would be fine since all the FL FA's would be below them using that. In other words, there is no perfect answer - someone's ox is going to be gored, so it depends on who you ask.

Jim

I agree that this was probably the best scenario. I don't know the seniority spread of the WN F/A's, but it sounds like the majority will be senior to EVERY FL F/A. Once the seniority list and operations are combined, all F/A's will be doing the same job under the same contract with the same company. Why should they all not receive the same pay/benefits? I may be missing something, or I may just not be that kind of person, but I don't understand the argument that FL F/A's should have to give something up in this merger.
It sounds petty & selfish to say "Even though we all work for the same company and do the same job, and we got 2.5 years added to our seniority (which makes most of us senior to every one of you) I don't want you to have what I have; you should have inferior benefits, less pay, and generally be treated worse than us".
Like Jim said, if they had used 5 years or 10 years, thus causing the FL F/A's to be in the bottom 99%, that is called "stapling" which is now illegal.
I think instead of infighting, you should use that energy to keep WN on top of their competitors.

 

[Kev3188]

Why should they all not receive the same pay/benefits? I may be missing something, or I may just not be that kind of person, but I don't understand the argument that FL F/A's should have to give something up in this merger.

I don't get it, either; especially since the FL F/A's had no say in the matter. If WN F/A's want to be angry, they need to direct their ire at the BOD.

 

[buscador]

I don't get it, either; especially since the FL F/A's had no say in the matter. If WN F/A's want to be angry, they need to direct their ire at the BOD.

And we are, our union Twu556 crumbled, they gave away the house... you guys are right that SWA is much bigger than AT so it wasnt a huge impact,,,,but in the big picture the AT people or SWA people dont see is simply this,, because there was a # 2.5 years + for the SWA side(not enough) and not a ratio,, it will hurt all the SWA/AT Fa's in the future,, so when SWA goes after another company that is much more senior i.e Alaska(with Fa's of 30+ years) they will ask for the same deal that AT got,,, we will add 2.5 years to the New/original SWA companies FA's and alaska will get a bigger windfall than AT did or could of imagined....

Now the next airline SWA buys out will have the upper hand if it goes to arbitration,, they will simply say ,, hey SWA only added 2.5 years on the last deal, while they gave away their industry leading contract and thats exactly what we want... the arbitrator will start at that point and All original SWA/AT fa's will lose even more,,that will forever be the answer,,,,

but hey we have now become the Lottery Airline,,others in trouble hope SWA buys them out so they will get huge payraises and bennies for the same job they are doing now,,, I have already been asked by american FA's if they think SWA will buy them out,, American is more senior then alaska,,, wow,, SWA keeps handing out seniority and pay,, all the originals may be on reserve soon,,,this is not good,, will not be good for anyone who started at SWA,,

I may just have to play the mega millions and power ball ,, maybe I will win a lottery ticket someday as well,,,

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

... it will hurt all the SWA/AT Fa's in the future,, so when SWA goes after another company that is much more senior i.e Alaska(with Fa's of 30+ years) they will ask for the same deal that AT got,,, we will add 2.5 years to the New/original SWA companies FA's and alaska will get a bigger windfall than AT did or could of imagined....

Oh good lord. You are really dreaming if you think WN will buy or merge with Alaska. Yeah, that'll be the day.

 

[swamt]

Oh good lord. You are really dreaming if you think WN will buy or merge with Alaska. Yeah, that'll be the day.

Never say never. The Frontier and AirTran rumers were flowing about 1-2 years prior to each getting offers. The SWA buying or merging Alaska has also been a rumor for the last year or so. Do not think that it will never happen. Mark my words, SWA will buy or merge or something, with another airline sometime in the future. My prediction is it will be by the end of 2015 or so.

 

[buscador]

Never say never. The Frontier and AirTran rumers were flowing about 1-2 years prior to each getting offers. The SWA buying or merging Alaska has also been a rumor for the last year or so. Do not think that it will never happen. Mark my words, SWA will buy or merge or something, with another airline sometime in the future. My prediction is it will be by the end of 2015 or so.

No need to reply to him,, I would agree with you Swamt,, there will be another take over,,,, I just hope the next airlines FA's are a little more reasonable and apprecitative,, and try not to take it all!!!.. just saying,,,

 

[Kev3188]

Oh good lord. You are really dreaming if you think WN will buy or merge with Alaska. Yeah, that'll be the day.

I agree, but...

Never say never.

Also true, but remember AS has repeatedly-and emphatically- stated that they have no interest in merging with anyone.

 

[swamt]

No need to reply to him,, I would agree with you Swamt,, there will be another take over,,,, I just hope the next airlines FA's are a little more reasonable and apprecitative,, and try not to take it all!!!.. just saying,,,

I see what your saying now, this guy doesn't have a clue does he?

 

[IORFA]

Like Jim said, if they had used 5 years or 10 years, thus causing the FL F/A's to be in the bottom 99%, that is called "stapling" which is now illegal.

Just to be clear, there is nothing "illegal" about stapling. You are misinformed. Stapling can still happen, it just has to be agreed to by the union/work group. There might be the right situation with the right amount of incentives to make that happen again. Did you already forget that SWAPA tried to do just that to the Frontier pilots? They said NO, and they are now circling the toilet at this time instead of being part of a growing airline. Also, there is nothing that says an arbitrator can't staple an acquired work group either. Please try not to post completely false information!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Just to be clear, there is nothing "illegal" about stapling.

Technically you're right. For all practical purposes, however, I can't see one group say "We think it's fair for all our people to be below all your people" nor an arbitrator ruling that stapling one group to the bottom of the other group's list is fair. One can come up with hypothetical situations where a staple of one group below another would be seen as fair, but it's very unlikely to occur in the real world.

Jim

 

[buscador]

Technically you're right. For all practical purposes, however, I can't see one group say "We think it's fair for all our people to be below all your people" nor an arbitrator ruling that stapling one group to the bottom of the other group's list is fair. One can come up with hypothetical situations where a staple of one group below another would be seen as fair, but it's very unlikely to occur in the real world.

Jim

Then how can an arbitrator look at a situation where ONE and only ONE group recieves tremendous financial UPGRADES in excess of %40, substantial quality of life upgrades, and bennies (AT)and the Other group(SWA) is left with Only headaches and the one Option for the larger group is too LOSE seniority,,,, what logic can an Arbitrator Look at this deal, then offer that group(AT) DOH or even worse Relative seniority and a all the Financial benefits,,leaving SWA FA's with absolutely NOTHING???? O I am sorry SWA FA's get MExico overnights(oooohhhh yea) Where is the logic or Fairness in that scenario???

Only in the Airline business could this even be possible!!!

 

[NYCDelta]

Just to be clear, there is nothing "illegal" about stapling. You are misinformed. Stapling can still happen, it just has to be agreed to by the union/work group. There might be the right situation with the right amount of incentives to make that happen again. Did you already forget that SWAPA tried to do just that to the Frontier pilots? They said NO, and they are now circling the toilet at this time instead of being part of a growing airline. Also, there is nothing that says an arbitrator can't staple an acquired work group either. Please try not to post completely false information!

Nothing I said was completely false information. The LAW known as McKaskill-Bond was passed to promote "fair and equitable" seniority integration after the TWA employees were STAPLED to the bottom of the AA seniority list. I can guarantee that any arbitrator would take that into consideration during any merger/acquisition. Now if an employee group chooses to go below another for a bigger payout or better benefits, then that's their prerogative. But if any group is unwillingly stapled, they will use McKaskill-Bond to prevent that from happening again.

 

[AvTech04]

Then how can an arbitrator look at a situation where ONE and only ONE group recieves tremendous financial UPGRADES in excess of %40, substantial quality of life upgrades, and bennies (AT)and the Other group(SWA) is left with Only headaches and the one Option for the larger group is too LOSE seniority,,,, what logic can an Arbitrator Look at this deal, then offer that group(AT) DOH or even worse Relative seniority and a all the Financial benefits,,leaving SWA FA's with absolutely NOTHING???? O I am sorry SWA FA's get MExico overnights(oooohhhh yea) Where is the logic or Fairness in that scenario???

Only in the Airline business could this even be possible!!!

Like you said, only in the airline business can this be possible... If you don't like it, then leave. Because it sounds to me like you hate the "airline business".

You have to remember, an arbitrator will only work on the seniority list, SWA F/A's, mechanics, CSR's can bring their claim to an aribitrator of pay increases and QOL, but AT unions are going to stake the claim that none of them, including the airline, was in any shape, form or fashion in financial distress, and the buyout was not decided by the workgroups nor the unions that represent them, and pretty much void the QOL and job security increase because that was never in jeopardy to begin with... That's just my take on how an arbitrator might take it. I wish all the work groups the best of luck and hope we can work something out, but if you go to arbitration and get something worse then you'll have no one else blame but yourself.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Then how can an arbitrator look at a situation where ONE and only ONE group recieves tremendous financial UPGRADES in excess of %40, substantial quality of life upgrades, and bennies (AT)and the Other group(SWA) is left with Only headaches and the one Option for the larger group is too LOSE seniority,,,, what logic can an Arbitrator Look at this deal, then offer that group(AT) DOH or even worse Relative seniority and a all the Financial benefits,,leaving SWA FA's with absolutely NOTHING???? O I am sorry SWA FA's get MExico overnights(oooohhhh yea) Where is the logic or Fairness in that scenario???

Only in the Airline business could this even be possible!!!

You got one thing right - only in the airline business. Most companies work by merit or DOH, so your entire argument goes out the window at most companies.

The question of what an arbitrator might do will be equally unpleasing. Within the confines of the law, they can do pretty much anything that they think meets the "fair" standard. If the WN/FL integration of FA's went to arbitration the arbitrator could easily rule that a straight ratio integration OR a straight DOH integration was fair - both worse for the WN FA's than the integration agreement you're complaining about.

You make a big issue of what the WN FA's don't get. But it's all what you already have - the pay, the benefits, the flexibility, etc. You will lose none of that because of the merger. Even seniority - by giving the WN FA's the extra 2.5 years for the list integration they gain seniority. Just picking numbers, the #5000 out of 10,000 WN FA will be no lower than #6125 out of 12,500 - still half way up the list. That FA could be #6000 of the 12,500 - a gain in seniority. Meanwhile the #1250 FL FA (middle of the FL list) could easily be #7000 of the 12,500 on the combined list - a loss of seniority.

It certainly seems that you're only looking at one thing - how many WN FA's are above you on the list vs how many FA's are above you on the combined list, and saying "See, I'm further down the list than I was so I lost seniority." But seniority doesn't work that way. Seniority is your relative position on a list, no matter how many names are on that list. If you're at exactly 50% of WN's list and exactly 50% of the combined list you neither gained nor lost seniority.

Jim

 

[AvTech04]

You got one thing right - only in the airline business. Most companies work by merit or DOH, so your entire argument goes out the window at most companies.

The question of what an arbitrator might do will be equally unpleasing. Within the confines of the law, they can do pretty much anything that they think meets the "fair" standard. If the WN/FL integration of FA's went to arbitration the arbitrator could easily rule that a straight ratio integration OR a straight DOH integration was fair - both worse for the WN FA's than the integration agreement you're complaining about.

You make a big issue of what the WN FA's don't get. But it's all what you already have - the pay, the benefits, the flexibility, etc. You will lose none of that because of the merger. Even seniority - by giving the WN FA's the extra 2.5 years for the list integration they gain seniority. Just picking numbers, the #5000 out of 10,000 WN FA will be no lower than #6125 out of 12,500 - still half way up the list. That FA could be #6000 of the 12,500 - a gain in seniority. Meanwhile the #1250 FL FA (middle of the FL list) could easily be #7000 of the 12,500 on the combined list - a loss of seniority.

It certainly seems that you're only looking at one thing - how many WN FA's are above you on the list vs how many FA's are above you on the combined list, and saying "See, I'm further down the list than I was so I lost seniority." But seniority doesn't work that way. Seniority is your relative position on a list, no matter how many names are on that list. If you're at exactly 50% of WN's list and exactly 50% of the combined list you neither gained nor lost seniority.

Jim

And that's applies to virtually all the work groups, except the pilots ofcourse..