Originally Posted by
Delta1067
Why subsidize FO pay by lowering Capt pay. That is not the answer. That is nothing more than Obama style liberalism in an attempt to spread the wealth. If you don't like the FO pay then don't show up for the job.
Your comment doesn't make any sense...
At your adopted airline, taking a 12 year CA and comparing with a 12 year FO on the 717, shows FO pays 68.4% of CA pay. This 68% holds true across that airframe all the way to 777 pay at 12 year.
At Air Wisconsin, the year 16 pay for an FO is 47.4% of CA pay.
If ALPA would adopt a 68% policy, you would see year 16 FO pay at $65.96 compared to $97.00 for CA.
Or, based on ALPA stating that we have no leverage (and the fact that unions tend to be more along the lines of your "Obama" critique), the 68% values at year 16, with no increase in the pot, would be: $57 for FO, $84 for CA.
These values, while "spreading the wealth" would fall more in line with the DAL pay scales with the consideration of a smaller pot to divvy out.
I assume you will be leading the charge to decertify ALPA and utilize a direct relationship with DAL management, since you are against "Obama style liberalism" (which you support by being an ALPA member). Of course, if you are a non-member paying a contract MX fee, I commend you for following your views in your actions.
Originally Posted by
tom11011
Isn't it a reasonable hypothesis that your union has much to say about what you get paid? There is a pool of money for salaries that gets divided up.
Hypothetical pay scale here.
FO
Year1 = 24/hr
Year2 = 28/hr
Year3 = 33/hr
Capt
Year4 = 60/hr
Year5 = 67/hr
Year6 = 75/hr
Would the pilots agree to the following flatter scale?
FO
Year1 = 34/hr
Year2 = 38/hr
Year3 = 43/hr
Capt
Year4 = 50/hr
Year5 = 57/hr
Year6 = 65/hr
Discuss.