Originally Posted by
shiznit
This can't have any semblance of validity no matter what. Too many variables that go beyond this. What if you have a 6hr min day like FDX(which is a 12.5% increase over the 5:15, but only effective some of the time, call it 7% real increase), then you tack on a full 6hrs for every training event (2.5% yearly increase to income), 6hs/day for each week of vacation (an average yearly income increase of approx. 4.2%), an extra week of vacation per pilot (average yearly income increase of 4.5%), a 75 min. guar. (an increase of approx. 5%). Up the DC to 18% (increase of 4%).
This adds up to an average increase of 27% PER PILOT without any rate increases or any other types of workrule enhancements.
Payrates are notoriously deceiving is all I'm saying.
(This in no way defines my personal "minumums", just point out all the other ways to increase income without payrates alone.)
Another very valid point by the Shiznit.
Many people see payrates as the key to defining a good contract, and workrules and benefits as tools to fine-tune the value of the compensation. It's actually the other way around: if you want to have a great impact in the next contract, you retain or capture the flying, you get work-rules that make your day at the office worth your while, you get a solid retirement contribution to be made tax-deferred,
then you set the mutliplier to yield the highest amount of total compensation you can negotiate with the company.
If we get a good contract, it''ll be more aparent from a careful read of of Sections 1 and 23, than a cursory glance at Section 3. Show me a huge headline increase (whether you call it "restoration" or something else), and'll show you:
12,000 pilots X 60% "yes" = 7,200 candidates for buyer's remorse.