Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
I agree, start with bringing the 9, 88 and 90 into 1 pay rate... wait, I take that back because are we going to base on seats or what the aircraft does? I mean the 88 and 320 should be the same if its on seats, but its not. The 90 and 738 should be the same now as 160 seates. The 757 has 10 varieties of seating configurations.
So what 3-4 tiers should there be? NB? WB? Range? INTL/DOM?
Interested to see what people think.
The Captain I was just flying with and I just spent several legs discussing this very idea. We came up with a 3 tier system.
First bring the DC-9 (will now be a 125 seater with the parking of the 30's and 40's,) MD-88, MD-90, 320/319, 737 700/800, all into one tier based on the current 737 rates.
Next tier would be the 757/7ER tier based on current 767 pay.
Finally a widebody tier for the 767-400, 330, 777, 787, 747 based on 747 pay rates.
Coupled with good international and redeye types of overides.
We felt that this would do several things for our pay system:
Reduce training cycles as there would be less chasing of payrates.
Provide marketing with the ability to plan routes with labor costs being less variable. Planners love "fixed costs"
Help to move us from a pay system that was set up to maximize "final average earnings" in the last 5 years for a pension based retirement to a system that gives a more steady increase over the average career to fit the current defined contribution system that favors "time value of money" for retirement.
Only three aircraft types to discuss at the negotiating table as all others would slot into one of these.