View Single Post
Old 03-06-2014 | 06:09 AM
  #40  
DAL 88 Driver's Avatar
DAL 88 Driver
At home on the maddog!
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare
Ahhhhh OK, so when someone is making more, then it can be used. When they make less, you ignore it. Got it. No double standard there. No vacuum. And also, since you have pointed out many times, SWA never went thru BK, so their pay is not affected, and therefore is still at pre BK rates. The "restoration" argument that should be made in this case is relative to others that have been damaged, and that does NOT include SWA. Don't get me wrong, I think we should make more than they do, and if they ever sign a contract, I will wager that you will find we will. And when we sign our next contract, it will be by a significant amount. But it probably won't satisfy your C2K + metric.


Really?

I get that we should it to bolster our argument, but you cannot ignore those making less because you then open the door to that argument. Look at it the other way around. The company can say that we make more than 95% of the other carriers on an equivalent equipment basis. You then say, but not SWA. It just doesn't make sense as a negotiation tactic. And then you even want to go farther and say that since the M88 "does the same job as a SWA 737" that it should be considered in the same vein. I have a 12 leg trip later this month (failed bidding). Should that be considered similar because it is the exact same Florida shuttle that SWA does?

Oh, and when is the vote?
Your thinking is so one dimensional. I didn't say anything about SWA pay being our entire argument. It's just one thing that contributes to the case for restoration. Other carriers with pilots making less are also not nearly as profitable as Delta. Also, many of those carrier's pilots took extreme pay cuts in their company's bankruptcies and should be making more than what they're making now too. You are under the (false) impression that there is some rule in business that says employee costs have to be equal between companies. This is simply not true.

But go ahead and resign yourself to bankruptcy level compensation as a new normal. I'm not going to change your mind.
Reply