Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Former Tranny bidding SW Captain prior to 2015?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Let him sue then. SWAPA has a reserve fund of over $12 Million. I am sure this jack wagon has quite a bit less.

That being said the language is air tight. If he wants to bang his head against the wall for sport then I will just sit on the sidelines and enjoy the show.

The "jack wagon" you refer doesn't need a dime if he finds a greedy labor lawyer who will take the case on a contingency. There only has to be one person with deep pockets, that would be the person or entity being sued. That's why so many frivolous lawsuits get filed in this country.
 
DFR lawsuits are incredibly hard to win, so you usually won't find any attorneys willing to take them on a contingency basis. They want their money.
 
DFR lawsuits are incredibly hard to win, so you usually won't find any attorneys willing to take them on a contingency basis. They want their money.

I would think especially in this situation, where his "case" is not only against the interests of every other member (assuming he attempts to sue SWAPA for DFR), but also against the clear intent of the agreement. Ah well, I suppose we'll see what happens.

Bubba
 
Just a thought. Since the announcement of the sale of the B717's would that not void or at least open the SL's for amendment and/or changes since much of the agreement was based on the incorporation of the B717?
 
How would it void it???

After you open it up, then what?

Come to SWA and SWAPA and say we want more?
 
Last edited:
There's actually case law with the NMB to do exactly that in this scenario. However, the AirTran MEC would prefer to work WITH Southwest rather than getting litigious.

If you threaten legal action they will just shut down and say "Bring it. See you in court." But if you work peacefully to find a middle ground, you leave your negotiating options open.
 
There's actually case law with the NMB to do exactly that in this scenario. However, the AirTran MEC would prefer to work WITH Southwest rather than getting litigious.

If you threaten legal action they will just shut down and say "Bring it. See you in court." But if you work peacefully to find a middle ground, you leave your negotiating options open.

I am sure you can tell everybody what case law you are referring too. I say you cannot, so prove me wrong or stop stirring the pot again.
 
Asking for more would imply that we actually got something in the first place.

Cue the SWA pilot (ret air force) to tell us how we should be thankful to have a job at SWA and if we don't like it we don't have to work there in 3,2,1
 

Latest resources

Back
Top