Originally Posted by
WILLTinbound
you can't be serious.. wasnt the cost of inflation last year somewhere in neighborhood of 6%? you really think that you can achieve a COLA like that from ANY airline? the highest Ive seen at the regional level is 1.5% at Eagle, I think.. now, I'm not here to argue whether or not we deserve that or not, b/c I'm sure we'd all agree on that issue.. and I'm sure I'll be made fun of for accepting something lower than I think Im worth, but as for right now, I'll be voting yes when the chance comes.. in my opinion, there were too many people expecting too many things from this pay proposal.. and a COLA that matches inflation is just one of many unrealistic expectations
COLA at XJT is 3%. This was increased from 2.5% in December of 2006 and it goes through 2010.
Originally Posted by
TonyWilliams
Since dues aren't effectively optional at ASA, surely they figure into the comparison. And we could quibble that those dues are paid with taxable money to get the tax deduction, but sure, it's not EXACTLY 1.95% in actual cost. I'm confident that there are tax situations where is may be more.
Any pilot at ASA who is in their probationary period (one year but sometimes longer) pay ZERO dues. Also, any pilot can opt out and NOT pay any dues (they may still have to pay a shop fee of 1.45%[which is tax deductable as well], depending on their MEC policy).
Yes, they can be figured into pay comparison. Im just saying that many people dont pay dues, some pay a shop fee, and some pay an effective rate less than 1.95% depending on their tax situation. But the effective dues rate can NEVER be more than 1.95% because someone who doesn't deduct it or is unable to, doesn't get part of their dues money back and therefore effectively pays 100% of the 1.95% (but never more). Its a simple tax concept, really.
So my point is that you can compare but its not an apples to apples comparison because there is always a large percentage of people who dont effectively pay a full 1.95%.