Originally Posted by
Herkflyr
I strongly disagree...and it flies in the face of economics.
Should a new lawyer make the same as a partner?
Should a new-PhD assistant professor make the same as a "full" professor?
The bottom line is that newbies into many industries work much harder, but make much less, than the "old heads." This system actually incentivises the old heads to stick around. There is never a problem finding "newbies."
I do acknowledge in the example that I gave that you can move "laterally" (i.e famous professor is "stolen" by another university and starts at the top of the heap over at his new school).
But I am sure that we attempted to eliminate longevity into the pay considerations, management would want the old guys to make LESS, not the new guys make more.
I think the way we currently do it flies in the face of economics. It encourages the old to work until they die.
Should a new lawyer make the same as a partner?
Isn't a partner a part owner of the firm? I don't know any pilots that are part owners of the airline (other than owning a few shares).
Should a new-PhD assistant professor make the same as a "full" professor?
I equate this to the difference between captain and first officer.
But I am sure that we attempted to eliminate longevity into the pay considerations, management would want the old guys to make LESS, not the new guys make more.
The company does not want the old guys to make less. It wants the guys that have been here longest to make less. Age has nothing to do with it. The company does not want longevity taken out of it. If every company did it, our leverage would start going up. I'll tell you what's in it for the senior guys. If their company ever liquidates, they will be able to start over at a reasonable wage. Ideally we would have a national seniority list where you could take your skills somewhere else. Unfortunately we as a whole are too naive to think our company could ever fail. We laugh at the other groups who's airlines are struggling. I am talking about all airline pilots, not a specific group. My idea will never happen. It would give us way too much leverage. It is also against what we have always dealt with in this profession. Longevity pay might actually happen, but it will not help us as a whole. That is why management would take us up on it. It would be similar to when the 757/767 categories were merged here. Look at the 767 pay compared to the 767-400/330 pay. The 767 pay is closer to 737 pay. Longevity pay will be a concession.