Originally Posted by
gloopy
Not to mention we have 9-ish different fleets. That has a massive associated cost with it, and is also a huge contributor to the average block hours per month flown statistic. While "narrowbody" costs were isolated, its still not apples:apples because of the massive training churn we have that they don't. Not only lack of productivity due to the training bubble, but also in the resulting trip inefficiencies. Since marketing > flt ops and wants every plane to fly to every city every day, we're stuck with more 30 hour layovers while they keep on trucking and racking up their daily average. We also had a few hundred furloughed pilots that helped pull that stat down, exacerbating an already not exactly fair context.
And yet even then, at the end of our current book, they will still make $1 more than us on like equipment*?
*Considering that what…95% of their fleet is -700's while less than 10% (and falling every day) comprises ours.
Good points. I agree. But I've got to make one small correction/clarification...
The smoke and mirrors rate comparison ALPA produced for our last TA showed them making $1 more than us on like equipment by the end of the contract. This is factually inaccurate and, even worse, very misleading. For example, the
actual Captain rate at SWA is ~$186. But that's $186 per "TFP." So ALPA used a conversion factor to get what they claim is an apples to apples rate comparison. With the conversion factor, it does show them making $1 more. HOWEVER (and that's a BIG "however")... that doesn't really tell the story. Their contract allows for a good portion of their flying to be paid at premium pay. If you look at the end result of how many days they fly/how much they make versus how many days we fly/how much we make... they are still being compensated MUCH better than us while flying fewer days. THAT is the comparison that is relevant.
So, trying to just compare rates is in this case is VERY misleading. ALPA is smart enough to know the difference. The question we have to ask ourselves is, "why would they intentionally mislead the pilot group like that?" I think the answer is obvious. They were selling the TA and were more than willing to mislead us into believing the TA put us equal to SWA. Whatever it takes to get the TA passed... because they are the smartest guys in the room and know what's best for us. (Incidentally, it's this attitude more than anything else that I think is primarily responsible for the existence of DPA.)
BTW, I totally agree that comparing 737 to 737 is the wrong comparison to make. The MD-88/90 is the category that should be used for the comparison, as it is the category that has the flying most closely resembling the flying done by SWA.