Originally Posted by
XHooker
The current CAL pay bands are a result of Contract 97, which was not concessionary. FedEx bands, UPS has pay for FO/Captain, and I believe Alaska has historically banded, though admittedly, their aircraft have been fairly similar in size and mission. None of those companies have ever been in Chapter 11. PBS, on the other hand, is more closely related to bankruptcies (I think NWA is the only company to use it pre-9/11 bankruptcy)
There are legitimate arguments for and against banding, but it seems your history is a little off as well.
Ah yes, the 97 contract did "modified" an already banded pay scheme that as I said before was introduced during the second bankruptcy in 1990, further lowering the bar with a wide, and narrow body large and small scheme. Did you actually capture the most pay possible with the new scheme? I hardly think so but the company did because they wanted it.
And since you're in the business of splitting hairs, pardon me for seemingly leaving out such facts as "limited" historical banding, example UAL banded equipment in C2K (pre bankruptcy) with the 767/757, A320/A319, and the B737-300/737-500. However, those are generally limited to varients as the preceding pattern and your example of Alaska Airlines among others illustrates. Still doesn't maximize cockpit pay.
Fact is that banding always come into play during concessionary contracts and bankruptcies is a no brainer; that it is a tool used by those who from day one have set out to wage war on our wages and QOL. It's nothing new to this industry. Only the players are different and Jay Pierce recognizes that but right now SLI rules...