Originally Posted by
JamesNoBrakes
Seeing how some of those amounts probably due to ALPA's view that quantity of jobs is better than quality, I'd say it's not all that ignorant. At some point we (not just ALPA) decided it was better to hold onto our jobs and water down the industry, rather than preserve fewer jobs with higher QOL....
Have to agree on some level. You also have to add into that the first year pay, which ALPA negotiates. Because hey, it's all about the senior guys, "you're gonna move up in NO time to narrow body CA", etc etc etc.
Combine that with how much the guy had to fly and be away from home due to ALPA negotiating away the trip/duty rig provisions for the narrow body aircraft, yet retaining it on the wide body. Because, again, it's all about the senior guys.
Note/disclaimer: That's NOT a slam an ALL the senior guys. There are many the that "get it". But that doesn't change the FACT that the prevailing mentality of ALPA and every other unionized carrier has always been that way, and always will be that way.
Not a slam?
If you were to look at pay scales at UAL over 27 years, you'd see that the net percentage gain is greater in the narrow bodies. The UAL MEC that was in office during the first few years was mostly narrow body pilots.
If Glenn Tilton had gotten his way, there would not have been any narrow body airplanes at United. TED was meant to be a non-union low cost carrier. I'm surprised it didn't happen, given the high-powered, corrupt, sociopathic scum he was working with.
When our pensions got flushed, the senior guys lost a lot of potential earning power due to the short time left to make it up, as well as a much higher dollar value lost due to the longer time invested in their pensions.
TW