Airtran MEC voted no

[scoreboardII]

I understand that 'perception' is everything, but can we grow up a little. It's not that personal guys. Jeez! The ATN MEC voted based on the AGREEMENT in front of them. That's it, nothing else! The vote against the agreement was NOT a referendum on a SW career, person or anything else. Heck, internally your own unions vote against agreements all the time, does that make them anti-SW?

Lets look at it from the acquiring or "hiring" side: you guys are making it a business dealing, fine. This has also been a test of goodwill and faith, your side has failed in both respects.

Sending an ill informed NC to negotiate without knowledge of membership goals waisting everyones time, and allowing a MEC to ride blindly along until the eleventh hour, failing to let the membership decide the merits of the AIP.


These actions alone describe to a "T" the definition of negligence in any contractual business dealing, not even going into the failure of goodwill this harbors.

Time is money at SWA, guess ALPA hasn't figured that out when it takes weeks to do what SWAPA did in a day.

Not one person hasn't seen through the ALPA spin here "let the pilots speak before we let them vote". NOT. MOB rule of the loudest voices in a room is NOT democracy.

If they knew what the pilots wanted, how can an NC become so disonnected from them and a MEC? They can't, this is all turnning into an ALPA game. I wonder how many jobs ALPA kills this time, 1,700?.

 

[puddlejumper101]

Guys, we are all acting like we have more control over this than we do. The people that have control don't consult any of us, just keep that in mind. Also, to start a JS war, now thats just stupid on both sides. Am I pissed? yeah, if I think about it long enough I am. I think my anger right now is toward ALPA for denying the rank and file in Airtran (as well as me), the opportunity to voice my opinion. The FAB 7 as they are called, well those seven ALPA ATN MEC members pretty much told SWA and ATN pilots that we are not good enough to make this decision. The arrogance needed to do that is beyond me, either that or the vocal minority at ATN must have brainwashed them. 7 pilots at ATN made a decision on behalf of 7700 pilots. ALPA you get my middle finger, everyone else, we have no say so chill out. I had a vote and 7 better than me individuals took that away. 7 individuals that don't even work for SWA. YUCK.

 

[canyonblue]

Where is it written by the gods that the SWA pilots have to get anything out of this merger???????????

Fair and equiptable to both sides, that's where. You clowns spout off B/M and A/M every chance you get, how about "what's in it for the SWA pilots"? Your career expectations just went through the roof, what about the SWA pilot? What does he get out of this? You have nothing to offer this pilot group, so you have to purchase your gains with a seniority loss. That is exactly what will happen in arbitration, hopefully even better SWA seniority gains this time.

6000 getting a 10-15% bump at the expense of 1800 getting -25% to -38%.

Again with this stupid reference, I beginning to understand more and more how AAI is so messed up. As another poster pointed out, that example is relative skewed. If we used relative, the SWA pilots would receive an even bigger percentage loss than that. If you use DOH, you guys will still lose relative seniority percentage, so what's your point? Clueless.uke:

 

[PCL_128]

Consider this fact: the only document in this process guaranteeing integration was SL9/LOA.

Wrong.

 

[sooner01]

alot of us here talk about the industy while sumping the tanks on the airplane and trying to remember if we left our knee boards in the sporty's bag.

some of us would like to know the following.

is releative seniority unfair because alot of southwest guys are retiring. are any airtran guys retiring. and is that what airtran is asking for.

what is wrong with date of hire and is that what southwest is offering. to the airtran guys. if you are even with a guy hired the same year as you dont you both still have your seniority.

before you say shut and do your mag check we just wanted to get some insight from you guys that are titans in the industry.

 

[scoreboardII]

Wrong.

False.

CEO's are not required to accept an SLI.

SL9 gave AT an SWAPA the right to have SWA impliment the SL.

With SL9 gone, SL 8 back in force, the CEO has that option.

 

[PCL_128]

sooner, the offer wasn't even close to date of hire.

 

[PCL_128]

False.

CEO's are not required to accept an SLI.

False. We have a Process Agreement signed by all four parties that requires the company to accept and implement the SLI.

 

[scoreboardII]

Double false. PA does not require integration. Remember the "barring economic realites part"?

 

[Fubijaakr]

Wow actually that is not true azz wipe. If Alaska is only going to allow one JS to SWA ,SWA will do the same w/ Alaska. The problem is that the said pilot would not pursue it. It sounds like your the type to deny JS. Shows a lot about your character

Childish.

I don't ride either, and I believe that the Delta guys I know would buy a "DELTA SUCKS" lanyard. I don't know any Alaska guys, are they all Inuit?

Racist.

Wow. You knuckleheads are really starting to show your true "canyon" blue colors.

You smurfs must really be scared of arbitration.