Originally Posted by
watching6
No attack here, just explanation! I am on the 777 and I would support higher pay for more seats. Of course, in my case, only the 747 would be higher, but I still wouldn't want to bring them down to the 777 rate. I remember at CAL all positions were paid the same without considerarion for equipment. We were able to get that changed to reflect aircraft size (narrow body vs. wide body, then large narrow body). The historical methodology in the industry, long before UPS and the after BK I for CAL, was the payrate was based on the revenue sharing for the equipment size. The more seats the more the crew cost for carrying that revenue. Anyone else want to weigh in?
This was a better paradigm in the lost age of Defined Benefit retirement plans. Last few years of final average earning being a basis of calculation, hopefully one had enough seniority to hold the largest jet. Now that we have to save for our own retirement I think we would be better served by a single
rate for FO/CA, with a highly compressed pay scale, topping out at say 6-8 years instead of twelve. Make more money early in your career, a little less later, but with the increased time value of 401k/B-Fund contributions we would have much more for retirement.