Этот веб-сайт использует файлы cookie. Если вы будете просматривать или пользоваться этим сайтом, вы даете на это свое согласие.
Отменить
Вы знаете, что реклама помогает FlightAware в отслеживании рейсов?
Вы можете внести свой вклад в бесплатную работу FlightAware, разрешив показ рекламы на FlightAware.com. Мы следим за тем, чтобы наша реклама была полезна и не мешала работе с сайтом. Вы можете быстро включить рекламу на FlightAware или приобрести привилегированное членство.
Отменить
Back to Squawk list
  • 21

Southwest to postpone delivery of 67 Boeing 737 MAX 8

Размещено
 
Southwest Airlines Co will push back the delivery of 67 Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft by up to six years, delaying $1.9 billion of spending, a spokesman for the airline said. The delivery of the planes will be shifted to 2023-2025 from 2019-2022. (finance.yahoo.com) Ещё...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


tduggan2010
Tim Duggan 6
Herb Kelleher needs to come bacl....
yr2012
matt jensen 2
achutchison
Aidan Hutchison 5
Really? Nothing to do with the pilot negotiations?
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
You mean something like this?
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/swapa/assets/public_article/MAX_Lawsuit_-_Final_1.pdf?mtime=1463423841
yr2012
matt jensen 1
First - sell off older jets
Second - settle with pilots
patpylot
patrick baker 5
i read the link from joel wiley, and I wonder what the gripe is from the pilot union. Boeing aircraft that look just like the aircraft these guys/gals already fly. some new training is involved with the arrival of the max8's, and where is the harm there? I belong to several unions, and I see the need for that to continue, BUT, enough already. The benefits from a more efficient airplane should first accrue to the company- they are paying for the airplanes after all, and the pilots ought to view the new planes as a full employment guarantor. If a new, more generous contract results in reduced profitability, don't be surprised by layoffs. bad idea for everybody.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 2
There was and is a lot of detail and history presented in the article Joel commented on. It's important that you read the article and the references to the old Railroad act. It's important for you to understand the whole situation.
srobak
srobak 2
I believe the issue is 2-fold - first in that the exceptions with regards to allowing the new aircraft are not being run through the proper due-process of being added to the contract. As there is precedence for doing so - straying from the agreed upon process is cause enough for alarm.

The 2nd half is partially as a consequence of the first - in that no new training is being offered/pushed/promised/documented. The pilots and union are fearful that this total combination of process side-stepping will be used to force them out. This is a legit concern. Process and contracts exist for a reason. If an employer is not going to follow them - then it gives the appearance that something fishy is up.
IMissPiedmont
Steve Cravener 4
Why is it still referred to as a "budget" airline?
srobak
srobak -2
Have you not see the prices of everyone else in comparison? I fly almost weekly for work and ticket prices are 1/2 to 1/3rd those of everyone else for the more than 2 dozen destinations I routinely go to.
mgerrard
mark gerrard 5
WN is more expensive 80% of the time now. I am doing fare comparisons all day every day and they are hardly ever cheaper any more
jshhmr
josh homer 3
Not the same for everybody. Southwest out of DAL is way more expensive than AA out of DFW. Just priced MCO round trip. AA is $230, WN is $450.
patpylot
patrick baker 2
a question to srobak: where in the world is southwest going to find thousand of new pilots to wear their black bomber leather jackets and wear their American flag ties and fly their aircraft safely? Those spare pilots do not exist, and neither should the fears of the union. No airline is going to let pilots fly a new version without ground and simuolator training and some real stick time. I don't share the dread with the pilot union. The FAA wouldn't permit that to happen either.
srobak
srobak 4
Those who are unaware or who think "this could never happen" are also those who are the most surprised when the pants get yanked down around their ankles.

First rule in anything that becomes a matter of legality: If it isn't in writing - it didn't happen or it doesn't exist. Companies have pulled some really shady shit simply because they could and because there was no contractual language prohibiting it. Not saying that I think SW would do it... but in this day and age you absolutely must CYA. Because if they are allowed to take this un-written exemption to the rule this time - who is to say they wont try something much more significant next time.

There are new pilots all the time - and with the continued, rampant downsizing of our military - combined with the very lax approach to legal immigrant workers - crew replacement is not going to be an issue.
patpylot
patrick baker 2
the situation at southwest is by no way venomous yet, but if it came to the company riffing pilots because of a no-contract situation, if the company did something visible, nasty and numerous, I think there would be a general strike by the pilots at once, and then we all would see how fast the company to keep its flight schedule. There aint enough scabs out there, so that takes care of that.
northmechanicalofnh
John Spillane 1
That's okay , I like the older planes anyway!
jkcooney
Joseph Cooney 1
I agree with the comments of Pat Baker. No where in the realm of sanity would labor unions opt to delay further investments by an airline by demanding a rewrite of the retraining/upgrading that necessarily should follow. Sounds like self-destructive union behavior which is probably why unions represent less than 12% of the employed in this country.

Вход

Нет учетной записи? Зарегистрируйтесь сейчас (бесплатно) и получите доступ к конфигурируемым функциям, уведомлениям о статусе рейсов и другим возможностям!