Thread: Will It Pass?
View Single Post
Old 09-28-2022 | 10:00 AM
  #124  
KnockKnock
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
Guys our MEC and NC have been in touch with every other property out there No one is blindsided by our rates. Rates for 2022 305-310 range, 2023 320-335 range… The whole idea that we are impacting any other properties negotiations is empirically false. Most on here don’t understand where the market really is or where their NC really is. It’s called pattern bargaining and we all working together to improve every carriers pay and quality of life. Within a year we will all have very similar if not the exact same hourly rate, this is the mission and goal. No more pilot funded airlines!
I believe all the big six will have a NB rate of 335, by late 2023. I know that is way to low for the heavy hitters on here, but right now that looks like where we are all really going.
You edited your 2023 scale from 325-335 to now 320-335. Maybe that was an error or maybe you realized your original scale showed too much Alaska discount. Either way, if there is a know scale being negotiated by 5 other NC's why does ours fall outside of that scale? In your first draft, our '23 scale was $7 less or roughly 3% less than the BOTTOM of this range and $17 less or roughly 5.5% below the top. Why are we not squarely in the middle, if not the top of this range? Why are we compromising our rates, or anything for that matter, to bring our scope and work rules up par? Stuff we should have had decades ago. Rates aren't everything but this is just one more way the company shows us what they really think of us. We deserve better. This "snap up" WILL NOT bring our rates above 4% annually, especially if your stated range is in fact what's being negotiated. We will be below inflation for the next 3-6 years again. Especially if we're not going to hold them accountable on retro. We cannot count on other companies to do our heavy lifting. We have to stand firm and do it ourselves.
Reply