Originally Posted by
NotMrNiceGuy
Is there a discussion to be had regarding pay banding?
In the past, our WB pay rates were compared with the legacy 777/747; our NB rates were compared with 757/767. For this TA, they have both dropped an entire pay band at the legacies. The WB is now comparable to the 757/767 and the NB is now comparable to the A319/A220.
Would it benefit us more to have each aircraft pay its own rate to avoid setting the precedent of having such mediocre rates? Couldn’t such a low 777 rate hurt us in downline contracts and indicate that as cargo pilots we are worth less and willing to accept less?
I ran an example where the 777 set the bar and was equal to the new AA rates. From there the respective rates were 757 at 85%, Airbus at 88%, 767 at 92%, and MD at 95%. For 2027, we ended with the following:
777 - $488
MD - $464
767 - $449
Airbus - $429
757 - $415
I felt like those rates were much more tolerable than the current TA. I’m on the bus FWIW.
Fire Away.
So you want 5 different pay bands? Let's look at that. The MD is going away, so that pay band will possibly be short lived, especially if all the doom and gloom wet leasers are correct. You have the Airbus making less than our 767. So, if we are pattern bargaining, in 2027 the 777 makes $488, the 767 and 757 make $408 and the Airbus makes $390 per hour. That is based on Delta's 767-300 rate, which is banded with their 757. Isn't that how pattern bargaining works?
For those that are saying that total compensation is a smoke screen for substandard rates of pay, how do you justify those 777 FO's here that say they make more on the 777 than they would as a captain on the 75 working the same number of days. These aren't just junior FO's who would only be able to hold reserve on the 75, these are senior FO's who would be in the top 50% on that airplane. Are they lying? The 75 CAP pay rate is higher, so how do they make more for the same number of days worked if pay rates are what matter?