SWAPA "AIP reached with Company"

[HowardBorden]

You know Howie, you might consider not acting like a d!ck for a few posts and embrace any competing idea to voting in what you're faced with right now?? Because it's going to be a lot less fun for you to look up exact RJ/outsourcing numbers the rest of us live with if your coworkers vote this in. Make any sense to you at all?

No, that makes no sense to me at all!

All my energy going forward is to convince each and every voter how shortsighted voting away scope would be. If that includes pointing out the missteps of those that have gone before us then so be it.

You seem to want SWA to fall into the same trap that stifled growth at every legacy airline so you can revel in their misfortune. Just because your fate has been sealed, doesn't mean the rest of us are doomed to repeat that history.

SWAPA still has great scope in the CBA, it hasn't been bargained away YET. I implore everyone to view this from a long term lens and see the pitfalls for what they are. It is still a choice for SWAPA members. Please choose wisely.

 

[Flopgut]

SWA has always had a lot of help, and it will always need a lot of help. You would be smart to steer it toward a situation that is beneficial.

 

[Uncle Bunkle]

SWA Bubba told me the other day, over hot dogs and an Extra large Diet Pepsi, that he thought someone in SWAPA had a 'master plan' regarding this scope.

 

[HowardBorden]

SWA has always had a lot of help, and it will always need a lot of help. You would be smart to steer it toward a situation that is beneficial.

Your theory that SWA wouldn't be around without the "manna from heaven" is understood by everyone familiar with your posts.

Trust me, in this situation the pilot group needs nothing from anyone in order to make the right call. That being said, your false narrative that selling scope is a smart move is completely transparent. There is no need to fall victim to your "misery loves company" mindset.

 

[Flopgut]

Your theory that SWA wouldn't be around without the "manna from heaven" is understood by everyone familiar with your posts.

Trust me, in this situation the pilot group needs nothing from anyone in order to make the right call. That being said, your false narrative that selling scope is a smart move is completely transparent. There is no need to fall victim to your "misery loves company" mindset.

D Neeleman has started two airlines in the time that SWA decided it was too good to listen to him. UAL just tied up with his Brazilian airline. That could have all been growth or increase that involved SWA

 

[SWA Bubba]

D Neeleman has started two airlines in the time that SWA decided it was too good to listen to him. UAL just tied up with his Brazilian airline. That could have all been growth or increase that involved SWA

Actually, it was three airlines that Neeleman started since leaving Southwest: Westjet, JetBlue and Azul. Although listed as a "founder" of WestJet, Neeleman's contribution was less substantial, and he left under undisclosed circumstances two years into its existence. He then started JetBlue, and eventually was replaced as both CEO and then Chairman for lackluster performance. He then started Azul, which is his current gig.

So in his career, he was "asked to leave" two, and possibly three airlines, and this is the guy you thought would do great things at Southwest? So what that he likes and pushes codeshare--so would all major US airline management teams, including Southwest. Why not?--it makes them money by utilizing cheaper labor than their own pilots. Not to mention, Neeleman is against unionization, which is the reason he was able to have his way so much, often to the detriment of his own labor force.

So tell me again why you like him so much, Flop. Is it his his anti-union views? How about his continual push to outsource his employees' work? Perhaps it's just his track record in general, jumping from airline to airline.

Hey, maybe you guys at United should hire him.

Bubba

 

[Flopgut]

Bubba these other airlines in other countries are going to grow or get started whether or not SWA is affiliated. They'll be affiliated with another airline and they'll do better for it. I don't particularly like DN, but I appreciate the airlines he's been a part of. Smart, organic and inclusive growth. No Texas airport bs. No problems with class2 or etops they get the work done.

You need to vote no, but you also need to consider limitations

 

[SWA Bubba]

Bubba these other airlines in other countries are going to grow or get started whether or not SWA is affiliated. They'll be affiliated with another airline and they'll do better for it. I don't particularly like DN, but I appreciate the airlines he's been a part of. Smart, organic and inclusive growth. No Texas airport bs. No problems with class2 or etops they get the work done.

You need to vote no, but you also need to consider limitations

Not sure you know what "organic growth" means. Neeleman's (and other majors, for that matter) penchant for codeshare and farming out flying to cheaper operators is growth that is the exact friggin' opposite of "organic." Sure it grows the company's bottom line, but it does so while leaving your own workforce stagnant. On the other hand, actually hiring more employees, and doing all your growth flying yourself, IS growth that is "organic" in nature. That's what we prefer, and our current scope clause requires it. Our position is that any flying that we're capable of doing, should be done by us.

Bubba

 

[outerlimits]

D Neeleman has started two airlines in the time that SWA decided it was too good to listen to him. UAL just tied up with his Brazilian airline. That could have all been growth or increase that involved SWA

More bragging about codeshare


Love you man How about giving up some 737 or A319s.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

Not sure you know what "organic growth" means. Neeleman's (and other majors, for that matter) penchant for codeshare and farming out flying to cheaper operators is growth that is the exact friggin' opposite of "organic." Sure it grows the company's bottom line, but it does so while leaving your own workforce stagnant. On the other hand, actually hiring more employees, and doing all your growth flying yourself, IS growth that is "organic" in nature. That's what we prefer, and our current scope clause requires it. Our position is that any flying that we're capable of doing, should be done by us.



Bubba

In fairness, jetBlue - with 42 airline partnerships - has an upgrade time of under 3 years right now.