Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
If we had a longevity only based pay system it would be a huge win. It would mean that all of our A's would be paid at the highest rate, and with more block hrs, all Capt's would have the ability to hit the highest paying position. With our current system of pay, and AF flying the biggest metal, they save money with their longevity based pay and save money with our pay by longevity and type.
I believe your analysis to be flawed. AF isn't our competition for flying. That was removed from the equation in the JV. The other two alliances and other airlines are our competition.
CMR and ASA have very similar payrates. All of CMR A's are at or near the highest rate, while many of ASA A's are not. CMR's pilot costs (and total labor costs across all work groups) are much higher than ASA's because of their comparitive longevity. So instead of growing like ASA, CMR shrank.
Unless flying at an airline with a unique fleet or training footprint (i.e. all 737, all Airbus), there is no truth to the "lower training costs" associated with LBP. Unless they are rostered by their company (which I
really don't want), it only inverts the training pyramid as pilots get senior enough to hold desirable flying.
From a pilot perspective, LPB takes two factors in career decision (pay vs QOL) and converts them to one. That's great for the uber senior...not so much for the junior.
fwiw.