Quote:
We have more fleets and that is why management wants to pay band and increase freezes to 5 years if you move between within a band. They stand to gain more than UAL and we will lose many, many jobs. Large stagnation will result.
If pay banding didn't cut UAL training costs in half, why did UAL management want it? I got this number directly from a UAL MEC member. The next day I hear RA wants to cut our training costs in half. How is going to do that without pay banding?
What I see, is the usual suspects saying pay banding is no big deal. Which means we should do it for a bag of jelly beans.
Hopefully like sailing said I just made it up and it will not be in C2015.
Time will tell.
Jerry
The freezes within the bands and half the amount of fleet categories is the causality and the big savings, not the bands themselves, Jerry. Again, you are looking at the after effects and not diagnosing the correct causality. Originally Posted by gzsg
I see what you are saying, but I do disagree. We have more fleets and that is why management wants to pay band and increase freezes to 5 years if you move between within a band. They stand to gain more than UAL and we will lose many, many jobs. Large stagnation will result.
If pay banding didn't cut UAL training costs in half, why did UAL management want it? I got this number directly from a UAL MEC member. The next day I hear RA wants to cut our training costs in half. How is going to do that without pay banding?
What I see, is the usual suspects saying pay banding is no big deal. Which means we should do it for a bag of jelly beans.
Hopefully like sailing said I just made it up and it will not be in C2015.
Time will tell.
Jerry
Were we to allow freezes like that, then it would be a tremendous concession. That would be something to bark about, not the banding itself.