Originally Posted by
MikeF16
I don't get the no pay banding arguments, assuming pay only goes up and not down. All WB (including 767-300s) get 777 rates, all NB get 7er rates (at current rates +22/7/7 minimum). How is this bad?
People will still move planes based on seniority, trips, and bases. All the consternation over just 17 777s is gone when we've got over 100 airplanes at the top pay rate. If management happens to save a few bucks for training that's fine. A win/win is still a win.
The problem with pay banding is that it gives the company training efficiencies which equates to lower manning. Under the current "tier scale" and by way of an example, if a B777 or B747 Capt retires, then (llkely) an A330/B765 bids for that vacancy and a B7ER guy bids for the A330/B765 slot and so on...with each cascading event pulling a pilot out of his current category to train for the next higher payscale. Granted this isn't a "pure" example or an immutable rule but it nonetheless is a reasonable example of the current vacancy system.
If we were all paid the same rate based solely on seat position and longevity, as UPS does, the B777 and the B747 would likely be more junior than the B7ER or maybe even the B737 Caribbean Club. Why cross 10 time zones to go to Shanghai or Jo'burg when you can stay in the same time zone and make the same $$?
As a result, the B777 Capt who retires might have his seat filled by a senior B7ER or B73N F/O when the Capt pay rate is all the same. The cascade (and training churn) dampens and therefore not as many guys are in the training pipeline and thus the company doesn't need as many pilots.
I seem to recall that the B727 at UPS had a lot of really senior pilots because they would fly trips from their home to the sort and back and be home every day but still get paid the same as a Whale pilot who was sitting in Koln for 96 hours on a layover.