Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
Even if you could get past the near impossibility of how you would realistically transition to your longevity based pay system, it ignores what I think would be a devastating impact on jobs. Specifically, it would incentivize the company to buy larger aircraft since we would have taken pay based on revenue production out of the equation. Further, it would make our smaller aircraft relatively more expensive to operate thus putting more pressure on outsourcing the bottom end. These two points add a compounding effect to job destruction.
With our current system, we are seeing a reduction in large aircraft which means pilots will be displaced to lower paying positions. I get that. But it's requiring more jobs. If I had to choose between higher pay for fewer jobs, or slightly lower pay for many more jobs...I choose the latter.
Carl
+1
LBP=more stagnation and less jobs = huge concession! I'm all for movement which the company is obviously very opposed. Every move since our merger has limited true progression either from increased production requiring less pilots or JV agreements sacrificing premium flying, requiring less pilots. The reason this LBP keeps coming up is it's next on the agenda! The company is after one thing….fewer of us as possible!! I expect to hear the drum beat of benefits of LBP very soon from our very own association.
I encourage all to shoot this down just like the CDOs. It will come in charts and fancy stats etc…But it's arrival will mean more of the same, stagnation and less jobs overall.
T will argue the company will buy whatever they want regardless of pilot pay. I don't think the billions of RJs purchased support your claim. Our pay structure is not a small factor in what they purchase.