Flflyer83 wrote:

737MAX7 wrote:

swacle wrote:

ORD won't be contract. IAH won't be contract. MIA is not contract. You eant to see what WN is going to do with ORD, MIA, and IAH? Look at the reentry into SFO 10 years ago.

As a former CLE ramper with you I whole heartedly disagree. If they stay at 12 flights and under I will believe it will be contract.

These will not be contract. They’ll be WN employees and likely employees from MDW, HOU, and FLL depending on the bidding of the positions.

It all depends on the contract between the union and WN.

Case and point when UA went back into MDW, UA created a bid and ORD employees (ramp, C.S. mechanics) were able to bid for MDW. UA could not contract out MDW because MDW is covered by ORD's contract. If UA were to ever go back into MDW the same rules would apply we can not contract out above or below the wing work or maintenance at MDW. If the unions representing ramp, C.S. and mechanics have similar language in their contract then WN would not be able to contract out ORD and IAH. But if no such language exist then it is any ones guess which way WN will go.

bob75013 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

bob75013 wrote:

1) DAL is limited to 20 gates

2) WN is limited to 18 thru 2024

3) If the 20 gate limit is not lifted at DAL, WN will wnt to grow somewhere.

4) WN financed the half billion dollar DAL renovation. What makes you think it can't do it again?

5) No way in hell that WN goes to DFW and subsidizes improvements that only benefit American.

Well do you think WN might try a setup like this? Let DAL service O/D flights and then build a facility at AFW that would only handle connecting traffic. That would keep costs low as you wouldn't need to build TSA checkpoints except for crew members, passenger/guest parking facilities, rental car facilities, baggage claim, or ticket counters. I think it's an interesting concept that could work.

Not likely.

Name any other airport where that concept works

There's a first for everything. As more and more metropolitan airports become overwhelmed with O/D traffic it might be more efficient and reduce congestion to utilize out of the way airports for connecting traffic.

jayunited wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

737MAX7 wrote:

As a former CLE ramper with you I whole heartedly disagree. If they stay at 12 flights and under I will believe it will be contract.

These will not be contract. They’ll be WN employees and likely employees from MDW, HOU, and FLL depending on the bidding of the positions.

It all depends on the contract between the union and WN.

Case and point when UA went back into MDW, UA created a bid and ORD employees (ramp, C.S. mechanics) were able to bid for MDW. UA could not contract out MDW because MDW is covered by ORD's contract. If UA were to ever go back into MDW the same rules would apply we can not contract out above or below the wing work or maintenance at MDW. If the unions representing ramp, C.S. and mechanics has similar language in their contract then WN would not be able to contract out MDW and IAH. But if no such language exist then it is any ones guess which way WN will go.

You may be conflating bidding for the positions with whether the station is handled by WN employees. The latter question is controlled by the size of the station.

Cubsrule wrote:

jayunited wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

These will not be contract. They’ll be WN employees and likely employees from MDW, HOU, and FLL depending on the bidding of the positions.

It all depends on the contract between the union and WN.

Case and point when UA went back into MDW, UA created a bid and ORD employees (ramp, C.S. mechanics) were able to bid for MDW. UA could not contract out MDW because MDW is covered by ORD's contract. If UA were to ever go back into MDW the same rules would apply we can not contract out above or below the wing work or maintenance at MDW. If the unions representing ramp, C.S. and mechanics has similar language in their contract then WN would not be able to contract out MDW and IAH. But if no such language exist then it is any ones guess which way WN will go.

You may be conflating bidding for the positions with whether the station is handled by WN employees. The latter question is controlled by the size of the station.

I'm not confusing either UA could not contract out MDW when we went back into MDW because MDW is covered under the ORD contract. UA at best ran perhaps 15-20 flights a day out of MDW but the UA employees handled every aspect of the flight except check-in. United wasn't even allowed move employees who chose to go to MDW to part-time, they were still full-time even though we at best ran 20 flights a day out of that station.

If ORD is covered under WN's MDW contract then the union could demand that WN take employees from MDW to staff ORD. Employees would be awarded ORD based on seniority and then once at ORD employees would bid for their schedule (day shift, afternoon, midnight).

jayunited wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

jayunited wrote:

It all depends on the contract between the union and WN.

Case and point when UA went back into MDW, UA created a bid and ORD employees (ramp, C.S. mechanics) were able to bid for MDW. UA could not contract out MDW because MDW is covered by ORD's contract. If UA were to ever go back into MDW the same rules would apply we can not contract out above or below the wing work or maintenance at MDW. If the unions representing ramp, C.S. and mechanics has similar language in their contract then WN would not be able to contract out MDW and IAH. But if no such language exist then it is any ones guess which way WN will go.

You may be conflating bidding for the positions with whether the station is handled by WN employees. The latter question is controlled by the size of the station.

I'm not confusing either UA could not contract out MDW when we went back into MDW because MDW is covered under the ORD contract. UA at best ran perhaps 15-20 flights a day out of MDW but the UA employees handled every aspect of the flight except check-in. United wasn't even allowed move employees who chose to go to MDW to part-time, they were still full-time even though we at best ran 20 flights a day out of that station.

If ORD is covered under WN's MDW contract then the union could demand that WN take employees from MDW to staff ORD. Employees would be awarded ORD based on seniority and then once at ORD employees would bid for their schedule (day shift, afternoon, midnight).

Can you point me to the paragraph and contract to which you are referring? I’m not familiar with WN having coterminal provisions in any labor contract, but am glad to be corrected.

Keep mind that because, unlike UA, WN doesn’t choose to outsource any flying or very much ground handling, this sort of coterminal provision likely won’t make much difference in practice. ORD spots will probably go mostly to MDW folks senior enough to hold them regardless.

I think we have some people on the forum who are talking about all contracts like they are the same. I have worked in multiple positions at multiple airlines and I can honestly say that I have never heard of some of the rules regarding staffing that are being mentioned here.

TTailedTiger wrote:

bob75013 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Well do you think WN might try a setup like this? Let DAL service O/D flights and then build a facility at AFW that would only handle connecting traffic. That would keep costs low as you wouldn't need to build TSA checkpoints except for crew members, passenger/guest parking facilities, rental car facilities, baggage claim, or ticket counters. I think it's an interesting concept that could work.

Not likely.

Name any other airport where that concept works

There's a first for everything. As more and more metropolitan airports become overwhelmed with O/D traffic it might be more efficient and reduce congestion to utilize out of the way airports for connecting traffic.

Fair enough, and it's an interesting concept but (a) there's a reason no airline has ever or will consider a hub in any metro area smaller than about 1.5 million; they need the base of O&D traffic for them to work. (b) even if more and more metropolitan airports are overwhelmed with O&D traffic (and honestly, where are all of these overwhelmed airports?), there are plenty of others that have capacity and at least some O&D traffic (and would fall all over themselves and offer their first-born for the opportunity to host a hub/focus city operation). We can safely say that no airline will ever consider operating a transfer hub at an airport that does not have any O&D traffic.

Flflyer83 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

These will not be contract. They’ll be WN employees and likely employees from MDW, HOU, and FLL depending on the bidding of the positions.

Employees from existing stations aren't going to bid on positions at the new stations. They will open the floor to full on transfers and then post to the street to fill where needed.

So, the transfer isn’t a bid? Many would be surprised to hear they aren’t bidding for a transfer. There will not be a post to the street to fill the need unless people choose to quit instead of being forced to move. Some employees will be given the opportunity to move or they will be let go. These stations are part of the mitigation efforts to prevent furloughs.

I think the confusion here is they were saying the new stations wouldn’t be handled by employees across town bidding to work shifts at the new station.

A new station staffed by WN employees will have an opening bid for transfers coming from anywhere in the system.

If WN wants to go find labor contracts as models of inflexibility, inefficiency, and disfunction they'll know where to look.

Unless one knows very specifically that contract provisions for the craft at carrier A are substantially identical to carrier B there's no point in continuing that exchange.

Silver1SWA wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Employees from existing stations aren't going to bid on positions at the new stations. They will open the floor to full on transfers and then post to the street to fill where needed.

So, the transfer isn’t a bid? Many would be surprised to hear they aren’t bidding for a transfer. There will not be a post to the street to fill the need unless people choose to quit instead of being forced to move. Some employees will be given the opportunity to move or they will be let go. These stations are part of the mitigation efforts to prevent furloughs.

I think the confusion here is they were saying the new stations wouldn’t be handled by employees across town bidding to work shifts at the new station.

A new station staffed by WN employees will have an opening bid for transfers coming from anywhere in the system.

Right, but in practice isn’t that mostly MDW people? I guess I could imagine folks in smaller stations who want to move to Chicago but don’t want to deal with MDW, but it seems like that group likely isn’t huge.

Cubsrule wrote:

Silver1SWA wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

So, the transfer isn’t a bid? Many would be surprised to hear they aren’t bidding for a transfer. There will not be a post to the street to fill the need unless people choose to quit instead of being forced to move. Some employees will be given the opportunity to move or they will be let go. These stations are part of the mitigation efforts to prevent furloughs.

I think the confusion here is they were saying the new stations wouldn’t be handled by employees across town bidding to work shifts at the new station.

A new station staffed by WN employees will have an opening bid for transfers coming from anywhere in the system.

Right, but in practice isn’t that mostly MDW people? I guess I could imagine folks in smaller stations who want to move to Chicago but don’t want to deal with MDW, but it seems like that group likely isn’t huge.

Could be. With internal transfers being frozen the past 7 months there are people waiting for the opportunity to move around. People will bid just to see where they land in seniority so depending on that it could be attractive for them. And I know some agents in Hawaii used MIA as a ticket back to the mainland so there’s that too.

I see the ORD entrance as a issue for AA. American reminds me of the Frontier Airlines of Chicago. Poor service and # 3 in the market. I could see Southwest replacing American at ORD, replicating what we see in DEN with WN and UA dominating the market.

Pi7472000 wrote:

I see the ORD entrance as a issue for AA. American reminds me of the Frontier Airlines of Chicago. Poor service and # 3 in the market. I could see Southwest replacing American at ORD, replicating what we see in DEN with WN and UA dominating the market.

WN would never go down that road.

Not sure anyone here sees exactly what WN's plan is here opening up new markets during the downturn.
Rule one is by seniority.
Rule two is that you have to have 3 take-offs and landings ON TYPE every 90 days or in the sim.
The big 3 are shuffling 777's pilots on down to narrow body and narrow body out on the street to meet the down turn.
That means they have to train that 777 copilot to probably be a 767 copilot or maybe a 737/320 pilot or basically every other pilot in the system will have to be retrained.
That would be a year to wind down and about the same amount of time to wind back up.

WN is basically has one type, taking over new routes to keep the pilot group current means instant response when the market turns back around along with picking low hanging fruit.

Brilliant Actually.

Okie

Cubsrule wrote:

Can you point me to the paragraph and contract to which you are referring? I’m not familiar with WN having coterminal provisions in any labor contract, but am glad to be corrected.

Keep mind that because, unlike UA, WN doesn’t choose to outsource any flying or very much ground handling, this sort of coterminal provision likely won’t make much difference in practice. ORD spots will probably go mostly to MDW folks senior enough to hold them regardless.

I don't know if you are a union employee or not but I'm in management how is it that I know more about this then union employees? Don't take offense to that statement please it just over the course of my 25 years with United I've met so many people who have never read a single contract.

But if you go to the IAM's contract even the current 2016-2021 contract and click on the Fleet Service Agreement. Then go to Article 1 Section B the first bullet point in Section B: Chicago Points include CHI, MDW, ORD, OPC and WHQ.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Because United still owns or leases gates at MDW, if we ever decide to go back to MDW, MDW is covered under this current contract and has been covered since before I started working for United Airlines.

You might wonder how UA was able to contract out MIA it is because the union and the company signed a LOA deleting MIA when UA turned MIA into UAX station. Now that MIA is back as a mainline station as far as I know the union has not approach UA about insourcing MIA. But no such LOA exist between UA and the IAM covering MDW which means MDW is still covered by this contract and can not be outsourced.

If the union representing Southwest employees has such a clause in their contract then Southwest can not contract out ORD unless they get permission from the union first.

departedflights wrote:

I think we have some people on the forum who are talking about all contracts like they are the same. I have worked in multiple positions at multiple airlines and I can honestly say that I have never heard of some of the rules regarding staffing that are being mentioned here.

The contract between United Airlines and the IAM covers MDW. Please feel free to read all of the contracts on the link for yourself.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Secondly I never said WN has the same contract language as United. I've always use the word IF. If the union representing Southwest employees has similar language in their contract Southwest can't contract those stations. If the language does not exist under the current contract then Southwest is free to contract out stations like MDW and IAH. I never stated or implied all contract are the same. Just because you haven't heard of something does not mean it does not exist.

jayunited wrote:

departedflights wrote:

I think we have some people on the forum who are talking about all contracts like they are the same. I have worked in multiple positions at multiple airlines and I can honestly say that I have never heard of some of the rules regarding staffing that are being mentioned here.

The contract between United Airlines and the IAM covers MDW. Please feel free to read all of the contracts on the link for yourself.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Secondly I never said WN has the same contract language as United. I've always use the word IF. If the union representing Southwest employees has similar language in their contract Southwest can't contract those stations. If the language does not exist under the current contract then Southwest is free to contract out stations like MDW and IAH. I never stated or implied all contract are the same. Just because you haven't heard of something does not mean it does not exist.

Again, your hypothetical is incorrect and, as several of us have attempted to explain to you, irrelevant. The correct hypothetical is “if WN lacks a coterminal provision AND there is not some other contractual provision that precludes outsourcing, then WN can outsource the stations.” But here, there is another contractual provision: the fact that WN may not outsource any but the smallest stations.

I know you’re a UA guy, but you have to remember that UA and WN are different because WN values product consistency in a way that UA does not. We can argue about whether that’s a good thing - there are good arguments on both sides - but it pervades much of what WN does.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

I see the ORD entrance as a issue for AA. American reminds me of the Frontier Airlines of Chicago. Poor service and # 3 in the market. I could see Southwest replacing American at ORD, replicating what we see in DEN with WN and UA dominating the market.

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

SWADawg wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

I see the ORD entrance as a issue for AA. American reminds me of the Frontier Airlines of Chicago. Poor service and # 3 in the market. I could see Southwest replacing American at ORD, replicating what we see in DEN with WN and UA dominating the market.

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

Unless AA completely dehubs ORD, allowing WN to take over T3, that ain’t happening. AA ain’t dehubbing ORD unless they go out of business or DL gives up either DTW or MSP.

Plus, hasn’t there been some major investments at MDW in the last decade?

BNAMealer wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

Unless AA completely dehubs ORD, allowing WN to take over T3, that ain’t happening. AA ain’t dehubbing ORD unless they go out of business or DL gives up either DTW or MSP.

Plus, hasn’t there been some major investments at MDW in the last decade?

I also think WN likes running the show in their own (or mostly own) airports/terminals. No reason to give that up at MDW.

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

jayunited wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Can you point me to the paragraph and contract to which you are referring? I’m not familiar with WN having coterminal provisions in any labor contract, but am glad to be corrected.

Keep mind that because, unlike UA, WN doesn’t choose to outsource any flying or very much ground handling, this sort of coterminal provision likely won’t make much difference in practice. ORD spots will probably go mostly to MDW folks senior enough to hold them regardless.

I don't know if you are a union employee or not but I'm in management how is it that I know more about this then union employees? Don't take offense to that statement please it just over the course of my 25 years with United I've met so many people who have never read a single contract.

But if you go to the IAM's contract even the current 2016-2021 contract and click on the Fleet Service Agreement. Then go to Article 1 Section B the first bullet point in Section B: Chicago Points include CHI, MDW, ORD, OPC and WHQ.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Because United still owns or leases gates at MDW, if we ever decide to go back to MDW, MDW is covered under this current contract and has been covered since before I started working for United Airlines.

You might wonder how UA was able to contract out MIA it is because the union and the company signed a LOA deleting MIA when UA turned MIA into UAX station. Now that MIA is back as a mainline station as far as I know the union has not approach UA about insourcing MIA. But no such LOA exist between UA and the IAM covering MDW which means MDW is still covered by this contract and can not be outsourced.

If the union representing Southwest employees has such a clause in their contract then Southwest can not contract out ORD unless they get permission from the union first.

555 union member here, our contract clearly states that for ramp, ops, cargo, and provo is that anything less than 12 flights in a station can be outsourced for contract work, no matter what airport it may be. IAM which represents our customer service has the same clause as well but don’t remember the number they have.

jayunited wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Can you point me to the paragraph and contract to which you are referring? I’m not familiar with WN having coterminal provisions in any labor contract, but am glad to be corrected.

Keep mind that because, unlike UA, WN doesn’t choose to outsource any flying or very much ground handling, this sort of coterminal provision likely won’t make much difference in practice. ORD spots will probably go mostly to MDW folks senior enough to hold them regardless.

If the union representing Southwest employees has such a clause in their contract then Southwest can not contract out ORD unless they get permission from the union first.

For ground ops it’s pretty simple. On the TWU side WN can only outsource if the station has less than 12 flights. But that doesn’t mean they have to. Look at the neighbor island stations in Hawaii. I think we are in an environment where it doesn’t matter how many flights they plan, it makes sense to pull from the existing workforce to staff these new stations. To Cubsrule’s point, while these positions at ORD will be open to anyone in the system, there’s a good chance most of the people bidding will be from MDW.

SWADawg wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

I see the ORD entrance as a issue for AA. American reminds me of the Frontier Airlines of Chicago. Poor service and # 3 in the market. I could see Southwest replacing American at ORD, replicating what we see in DEN with WN and UA dominating the market.

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

With what gates? WN would need to get a hold of AAs gates or a similar number of them. Not happening.

Cubsrule wrote:

jayunited wrote:

departedflights wrote:

I think we have some people on the forum who are talking about all contracts like they are the same. I have worked in multiple positions at multiple airlines and I can honestly say that I have never heard of some of the rules regarding staffing that are being mentioned here.

The contract between United Airlines and the IAM covers MDW. Please feel free to read all of the contracts on the link for yourself.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Secondly I never said WN has the same contract language as United. I've always use the word IF. If the union representing Southwest employees has similar language in their contract Southwest can't contract those stations. If the language does not exist under the current contract then Southwest is free to contract out stations like MDW and IAH. I never stated or implied all contract are the same. Just because you haven't heard of something does not mean it does not exist.

Again, your hypothetical is incorrect and, as several of us have attempted to explain to you, irrelevant. The correct hypothetical is “if WN lacks a coterminal provision AND there is not some other contractual provision that precludes outsourcing, then WN can outsource the stations.” But here, there is another contractual provision: the fact that WN may not outsource any but the smallest stations.

I know you’re a UA guy, but you have to remember that UA and WN are different because WN values product consistency in a way that UA does not. We can argue about whether that’s a good thing - there are good arguments on both sides - but it pervades much of what WN does.

That is exactly what I've stated all along.

Let us go back to when the conversation started about WN ORD and insourcing vs outsourcing. The entire point that I've been making if you go back and reread what I've actually written is WN can NOT contract out ORD if there is language in their contract that prevents its. I've never once said I'm in favor of contracting everything that I've posted about WN and insourcing v.s. outsourcing every post clearly stated WN could not contract out if language or a provision existed in their contract similar to language in the contract between the IAM and UAL. I never once stated the contract had to read exactly the same word for word.

So before you say my hypothetical is wrong or irrelevant go back and reread what I actually wrote, which I have always stated if language exist WN can not contract out MDW or IAH. It doesn't matte what the clause says all that matters is there must be language preventing Southwest from unilaterally contracting out a station without union support. This has been my point from the beginning you are caught up on the exact wording of the contract which is fine but my point from the beginning was there must be language in the contract if there wasn't any language Southwest would then be free to do whatever they want. The whole purpose of a contract is to protect employees when situations like this arise.

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

More safe how? Care to explain?

LAXdude1023 wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

With what gates? WN would need to get a hold of AAs gates or a similar number of them. Not happening.

Stay tuned. I don’t think people fathom just how bad the situation is at AA. If they have to file CH 11, then they may have to part with some gates and slots to emerge from BK this time around.

Cubsrule wrote:

I know you’re a UA guy, but you have to remember that UA and WN are different because WN values product consistency in a way that UA does not. We can argue about whether that’s a good thing - there are good arguments on both sides - but it pervades much of what WN does.

One last thing if WN values product consistency and is so much better than UA at taking care of its employees why do yo need a union standing between you and Southwest management? If
Southwest employees trust Southwest management so much why then does Southwest has such a highly unionized workforce?

I know UA's history and the horrible labor relations between management and union employees, UA has struggled with labor relations since before I started on the ramp at ORD. Southwest on the other had has a great relationship between management and employees.

However, if there were no contract protecting Southwest employees, if the language preventing Southwest from contracting out stations didn't exist are you telling me you trust management so implicitly that you can say if given the chance they would NOT contract out smaller stations?

Don't worry I'm just messing with you, you don't have to answer any of these questions and there are good agreements on both sides, it's just food for thought. I

'm sorry for the misunderstanding it seems like we were both saying the same time (I was not arguing in favor of outsourcing) but somehow speaking different languages. UA's contract reads differently than WN's. I've never read WN's contract I don't even know who represents ramp at WN. My entire point in the comparison was language has to exist, if it did not Southwest management is free to do what they feel is best for the airline not necessarily what is best for the employes.

jayunited wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

I know you’re a UA guy, but you have to remember that UA and WN are different because WN values product consistency in a way that UA does not. We can argue about whether that’s a good thing - there are good arguments on both sides - but it pervades much of what WN does.

One last thing if WN values product consistency and is so much better than UA at taking care of its employees why do yo need a union standing between you and Southwest management? If
Southwest employees trust Southwest management so much why then does Southwest has such a highly unionized workforce?

I know UA's history and the horrible labor relations between management and union employees, UA has struggled with labor relations since before I started on the ramp at ORD. Southwest on the other had has a great relationship between management and employees.

However, if there were no contract protecting Southwest employees, if the language preventing Southwest from contracting out stations didn't exist are you telling me you trust management so implicitly that you can say if given the chance they would NOT contract out smaller stations?

Don't worry I'm just messing with you, you don't have to answer any of these questions and there are good agreements on both sides, it's just food for thought. I

'm sorry for the misunderstanding it seems like we were both saying the same time (I was not arguing in favor of outsourcing) but somehow speaking different languages. UA's contract reads differently than WN's. I've never read WN's contract I don't even know who represents ramp at WN. My entire point in the comparison was language has to exist, if it did not Southwest management is free to do what they feel is best for the airline not necessarily what is best for the employes.

The point is that you read employee relations through a "UA lens," which means that you presume that management wants to outsource as much as possible because that's how UA and (particularly) CO have historically approached things. But you can't really apply that lens to WN's contract or how WN staffing might work because WN is culturally different. As pointed out upthread, WN has the contractual right to outsource some stations that are not presently outsourced. I expect there is not a single UA station that could be outsourced but isn't, and there certainly isn't a bit of UA flying that could be outsourced but isn't. That's why we have the CRJ-550s.

jayunited wrote:

departedflights wrote:

I think we have some people on the forum who are talking about all contracts like they are the same. I have worked in multiple positions at multiple airlines and I can honestly say that I have never heard of some of the rules regarding staffing that are being mentioned here.

The contract between United Airlines and the IAM covers MDW. Please feel free to read all of the contracts on the link for yourself.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Secondly I never said WN has the same contract language as United. I've always use the word IF. If the union representing Southwest employees has similar language in their contract Southwest can't contract those stations. If the language does not exist under the current contract then Southwest is free to contract out stations like MDW and IAH. I never stated or implied all contract are the same. Just because you haven't heard of something does not mean it does not exist.

I never said that something doesn't exist just because I have never heard of it. What I am saying is that just because "ABC Airlines" has one thing in their contract doesn't mean that "XYZ Airlines" has it in theirs. That's all.

2travel2know2 wrote:

It should say "WN returns to IAH", as WN did fly IAH-HOU for some time, if I recall correctly, about the same time Continental flew IAH-DAL.

That appears that you've go tWN flying IAH to HOU!! They actually flew IAH-DAL and HOU-DAL. CO Express did the IAH-DAL route.

WNagent310 wrote:

jayunited wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Can you point me to the paragraph and contract to which you are referring? I’m not familiar with WN having coterminal provisions in any labor contract, but am glad to be corrected.

Keep mind that because, unlike UA, WN doesn’t choose to outsource any flying or very much ground handling, this sort of coterminal provision likely won’t make much difference in practice. ORD spots will probably go mostly to MDW folks senior enough to hold them regardless.

I don't know if you are a union employee or not but I'm in management how is it that I know more about this then union employees? Don't take offense to that statement please it just over the course of my 25 years with United I've met so many people who have never read a single contract.

But if you go to the IAM's contract even the current 2016-2021 contract and click on the Fleet Service Agreement. Then go to Article 1 Section B the first bullet point in Section B: Chicago Points include CHI, MDW, ORD, OPC and WHQ.
https://iam141.org/united-airlines-2/

Because United still owns or leases gates at MDW, if we ever decide to go back to MDW, MDW is covered under this current contract and has been covered since before I started working for United Airlines.

You might wonder how UA was able to contract out MIA it is because the union and the company signed a LOA deleting MIA when UA turned MIA into UAX station. Now that MIA is back as a mainline station as far as I know the union has not approach UA about insourcing MIA. But no such LOA exist between UA and the IAM covering MDW which means MDW is still covered by this contract and can not be outsourced.

If the union representing Southwest employees has such a clause in their contract then Southwest can not contract out ORD unless they get permission from the union first.

555 union member here, our contract clearly states that for ramp, ops, cargo, and provo is that anything less than 12 flights in a station can be outsourced for contract work, no matter what airport it may be. IAM which represents our customer service has the same clause as well but don’t remember the number they have.

IAM/CSA is 8 flights a day I believe.

Flyguy

bpat777 wrote:

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

More safe how? Care to explain?

Southeast Houston (where HOU is) is not the greatest area of town. Neither is north Houston near IAH, but has more of a direct freeway connection and doesn't require a person to drive through any neighborhoods. At HOU, a person has to drive down local streets to access the airport, and the area nearby is pretty rundown (though I wouldn't call it dangerous by any stretch - there are FAR worse areas in Houston).

Imo, this is usually what people mean when they say IAH is more "convenient" because honestly HOU is the same distance or closer to most of the business and wealth as IAH is. From the westside (say I-10 and the Beltway), taking the Beltway south is normally actually easier than taking it north in terms of traffic and hassle. Some people are just uncomfortable with the local neighborhood and don't use HOU as a result. I suspect the same is true of MDW vis a vis ORD.

YoungDon wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

More safe how? Care to explain?

Southeast Houston (where HOU is) is not the greatest area of town. Neither is north Houston near IAH, but has more of a direct freeway connection and doesn't require a person to drive through any neighborhoods. At HOU, a person has to drive down local streets to access the airport, and the area nearby is pretty rundown (though I wouldn't call it dangerous by any stretch - there are FAR worse areas in Houston).

Imo, this is usually what people mean when they say IAH is more "convenient" because honestly HOU is the same distance or closer to most of the business and wealth as IAH is. From the westside (say I-10 and the Beltway), taking the Beltway south is normally actually easier than taking it north in terms of traffic and hassle. Some people are just uncomfortable with the local neighborhood and don't use HOU as a result. I suspect the same is true of MDW vis a vis ORD.

Yeah, neither airport is in a great area. Its not like DFW or ORD where the airports are in a really nice part of town. IAH is sandwiched between Greenspoint, Aldine, and Humble. The later isnt so bad but the former is often referred to as "Gunspoint" around Houston. Aldine is just a blue collar Hispanic neighborhood but its not dangerous and Humble is a high crime suburb of Houston. HOU is between Sunnyside/South Park, Meadownbrook, and Gulfgate. All three of those neighborhoods are extremely high crime.

I would say IAH is in a "better" place as far as safety is concerned. Neither of them are going to showcase Houston's nicest parts upon exiting though. One thing that is different in Houston vs. a place like Chicago is that dangerous and safe neighborhoods tend to intertwine with each other. There are very few strictly dangerous or strictly safe places. Things blend and thats probably a product of no zoning. In Chicago you have places devoid of crime but places that rival Caracas for violence but they are separated in different areas of town. So unless the airport was located in West U, River Oaks, or Tanglewood, it would more than likely border on some undesirable areas of town anyway.

As far as convenience, I think unless you live right by one of the airports its overplayed. People will go to the airport that has the airline they wish to fly. No matter where you live in Houston, youll probably go to HOU if you want to fly WN or IAH if you want UA or are traveling internationally. I live in Meyerland which is 20 minutes to HOU and 30 to IAH no traffic. With traffic its 30 to HOU and 55 to IAH. I still dont care. Ill always go to IAH because I fly UA.

I could see in five or ten years that WN would move to ORD, and MDW would be a more even distribution of more airlines picking up traffic from the southern metro area.

BNAMealer wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

WN would never go down that road.

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

Unless AA completely dehubs ORD, allowing WN to take over T3, that ain’t happening. AA ain’t dehubbing ORD unless they go out of business or DL gives up either DTW or MSP.

Plus, hasn’t there been some major investments at MDW in the last decade?

I pray for this every day.

klm617 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

Sure they would. They have a history of doing exactly that. No reason to believe they can’t do it again.

Unless AA completely dehubs ORD, allowing WN to take over T3, that ain’t happening. AA ain’t dehubbing ORD unless they go out of business or DL gives up either DTW or MSP.

Plus, hasn’t there been some major investments at MDW in the last decade?

I pray for this every day.

You know what would happen to DTW if DL left?

It would basically be STL with maybe one or two extra foreign flags.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

Unless AA completely dehubs ORD, allowing WN to take over T3, that ain’t happening. AA ain’t dehubbing ORD unless they go out of business or DL gives up either DTW or MSP.

Plus, hasn’t there been some major investments at MDW in the last decade?

I pray for this every day.

You know what would happen to DTW if DL left?

It would basically be STL with maybe one or two extra foreign flags.

I think he means DL leaving and AA taking over as DTW’s hub carrier.

joeljack wrote:

Wow! Very interesting! ORD is a big market and just think, DEN is the biggest and most profitable hub for UA right now and WN is huge there. Maybe it won’t hurt UA or AA that much. I would think it will hurt their MDW operation some.

From ORD, I could see DEN, DAL, BNA, BWI and LAS to start with. Unless they throw Florida in the mix too.

there are two terminals being built to connect with Terminal One in the plans so they could be going to Terminal 3 until those connections are complete. or the new proposed western terminal is actually built.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

YoungDon wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

More safe how? Care to explain?

Southeast Houston (where HOU is) is not the greatest area of town. Neither is north Houston near IAH, but has more of a direct freeway connection and doesn't require a person to drive through any neighborhoods. At HOU, a person has to drive down local streets to access the airport, and the area nearby is pretty rundown (though I wouldn't call it dangerous by any stretch - there are FAR worse areas in Houston).

Imo, this is usually what people mean when they say IAH is more "convenient" because honestly HOU is the same distance or closer to most of the business and wealth as IAH is. From the westside (say I-10 and the Beltway), taking the Beltway south is normally actually easier than taking it north in terms of traffic and hassle. Some people are just uncomfortable with the local neighborhood and don't use HOU as a result. I suspect the same is true of MDW vis a vis ORD.

Yeah, neither airport is in a great area. Its not like DFW or ORD where the airports are in a really nice part of town. IAH is sandwiched between Greenspoint, Aldine, and Humble. The later isnt so bad but the former is often referred to as "Gunspoint" around Houston. Aldine is just a blue collar Hispanic neighborhood but its not dangerous and Humble is a high crime suburb of Houston. HOU is between Sunnyside/South Park, Meadownbrook, and Gulfgate. All three of those neighborhoods are extremely high crime.

I would say IAH is in a "better" place as far as safety is concerned. Neither of them are going to showcase Houston's nicest parts upon exiting though. One thing that is different in Houston vs. a place like Chicago is that dangerous and safe neighborhoods tend to intertwine with each other. There are very few strictly dangerous or strictly safe places. Things blend and thats probably a product of no zoning. In Chicago you have places devoid of crime but places that rival Caracas for violence but they are separated in different areas of town. So unless the airport was located in West U, River Oaks, or Tanglewood, it would more than likely border on some undesirable areas of town anyway.

As far as convenience, I think unless you live right by one of the airports its overplayed. People will go to the airport that has the airline they wish to fly. No matter where you live in Houston, youll probably go to HOU if you want to fly WN or IAH if you want UA or are traveling internationally. I live in Meyerland which is 20 minutes to HOU and 30 to IAH no traffic. With traffic its 30 to HOU and 55 to IAH. I still dont care. Ill always go to IAH because I fly UA.

If one approaches Hobby via I-45 and take airport road, there are no "high crime or so called unsafe" neighborhoods to go through. For those in West side, both approaches, via BW8 and Telephone road or through Broadway from I-45 are on the "higher crime" side. For IAH there are no local neighborhood pathways, so it is considered safer.

So Southwest's expansion to IAH is the right call, however the flights may be limited to DAL, DEN and/or MDW. HOU is Southwest's hub and they will maintain or grow it.

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

HOU isn’t the Houston airport in the area commonly known as “Gunspoint” to Houston natives (Greenspoint).

Flflyer83 wrote:

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

HOU isn’t the Houston airport in the area commonly known as “Gunspoint” to Houston natives (Greenspoint).

The neighborhoods around HOU are objectively worse than IAH.

Flflyer83 wrote:

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

HOU isn’t the Houston airport in the area commonly known as “Gunspoint” to Houston natives (Greenspoint).

Greenpoint is adjacent to IAH. Also, Greenspoint is not particularly dangerous.

Midwestindy wrote:

UA management isn't going to like this at all, they already have to deal with B6 in EWR now WN in ORD/IAH

This is big for people in the northern suburbs of Chicago, WN was normally never an option for me.

I wonder if this has any impact on WN's MKE service, likely a limited amount, but could be interesting....

I don't think it matters what UA management might or might not like. They have to call their plays the SAME as WN based on the Down and Distance to the first Down or TD.
WN has that big hub in DEN so it stands to reason they cannot be hiding anymore and they have to come and play in the Big leagues AT the Major league Parks!AND? ORD and IAH are two of them with DFW, EWR and JFK being another few You sand I both Know they've outgrown the Sandboxes they used to play in. So Like the man says in Let's make a DEAL? Southwest? Come on Down! lets Play!!. They Stepped out of that "Box" when they went to Hawaii. They can't hide now. or Ever Again.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Flflyer83 wrote:

lx2iah wrote:

We live in the far west Houston area in Katy/Cinco Ranch. We’re 32 miles to either IAH or HOU. 99.9% of the time we’ve flown from/to IAH. It just seems a bit more “safe” to fly from IAH vs. flying from HOU. We’ve only flown WN from HOU one or two times in the last 40 years. Hobby isn’t located in the best part of town. WN adding flights next year from IAH makes us extremely happy.

HOU isn’t the Houston airport in the area commonly known as “Gunspoint” to Houston natives (Greenspoint).

The neighborhoods around HOU are objectively worse than IAH.

I'm not sure that's true. Sunnyside and South Park are somewhat close to HOU in the same way as Greenspoint is somewhat close to IAH, but travelers to the airport don't have to pass through any of those neighborhoods in either case to get to HOU or IAH. Those neighborhoods are all right there at the top of Houston's most dangerous, but I don't find any of the immediate surroundings of either airport to be particularly dangerous, moreso poor and rundown.

My biggest gripe with IAH vs HOU is that even though I'm closer to HOU 45 is always backed up making any time savings a wash. Also, back when going to school in person was a thing I would frequently get stuck behind a school bus doing pickups while going through the neighborhood which can be frustrating when you're close to departure time. Once you actually get there though HOU is much easier thanks to its smaller size.

I have a preference for flying WN but now in the Uber/Lyft era I just pick whichever airline and airport combo gives the most convenient schedule and price. For example I will fly out from HOU on WN then come back to IAH on AA.

strfyr51 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

UA management isn't going to like this at all, they already have to deal with B6 in EWR now WN in ORD/IAH

This is big for people in the northern suburbs of Chicago, WN was normally never an option for me.

I wonder if this has any impact on WN's MKE service, likely a limited amount, but could be interesting....

I don't think it matters what UA management might or might not like. They have to call their plays the SAME as WN based on the Down and Distance to the first Down or TD.
WN has that big hub in DEN so it stands to reason they cannot be hiding anymore and they have to come and play in the Big leagues AT the Major league Parks!AND? ORD and IAH are two of them with DFW, EWR and JFK being another few You sand I both Know they've outgrown the Sandboxes they used to play in. So Like the man says in Let's make a DEAL? Southwest? Come on Down! lets Play!!. They Stepped out of that "Box" when they went to Hawaii. They can't hide now. or Ever Again.

I think WN stepped out of the box a long time ago when it started flying to LGA LAX, and DCA , SFO

BNAMealer wrote:

What the heck? Thrilled about ORD, but why the sudden reversal of longstanding practices? Where are they even going to go in ORD?

I wonder if they sense blood with AA and are trying to take advantage?

I'm all for anything that "takes advantage" of AAmerican!!!

BNAMealer wrote:

What the heck? Thrilled about ORD, but why the sudden reversal of longstanding practices? Where are they even going to go in ORD?

I wonder if they sense blood with AA and are trying to take advantage?

I'm all for anything that "takes advantage" of AAmerican!!!

SWA was bumped out of IAH before due to competition and my guess, it will happen again... Go ahead nay sayers and armchair CEOs , have at it. History is usually repeated.