Pay, or scope?
 

I'd like to throw this out to the rank-and-file pilots, since I don't know that anyone has asked the question:

Imagine for a moment that the company were willing to amend the CBA right now, and you could get one wish. The choices are:

o A pay scale that equals the average of the Big Four, plus 1%

Or

o An industry-standard scope clause, codified in the CBA


Which would you choose, and why?

(full disclosure; to my knowledge, the company is NOT considering this; I'm simply curious to know the general consensus, that's all)

Both, because that's what's reasonable.

Delta has good pay and they have scope.
American has good pay and has scope.
United has good pay and has scope.
Southwest has good pay and has ULTIMATE scope. Zero outsourcing allowed.
Spirit has crap pay but is in negotiations for higher pay and does zero outsourcing.
Frontier has crap pay but is in negotiations and does zero outsourcing.
Allegiant has low pay but zero outsourcing.
Hawaiian has mediocre pay but no outsourcing.
JetBlue has below average pay, is in negotiations, and does no outsourcing.

When compared to those with similar pay to ours, our outsourcing is out of control.

When compared to those with outsourcing, our pay is pathetic.


Acceptable solutions are as follows:

1) Pay parity with DAL/UAL/AMR, and scope that limits seats to 76, weight to 86k, and airframes to a percentage comparable to DAL/UAL/AMR.
2) Pay parity with Southwest which would be a smaller increase, and the end of outsourcing completely. Every E175/Q400 flown by Alaska Airlines pilots.


Those options are reasonable as per industry standards. Anything less needs to be rectified. The excuse of "Oh, we're only 5th in revenue, we can't pay like the big companies" is complete garbage. We're 5th in revenue, but 6th in pilot group size. So if you're paying fewer pilots than your revenue position, you have more revenue per pilot than anyone else.

While I do not condone engaging with trolls, you sir may drop the mike! Dilly Dilly!

Dilly dilly!

:D




But seriously, the premise of this question is flawed.

"You have two problems. Which would you like to fix?"

"Uh, both?"

This is like an airliners .net thread.

Ladies and gentlemen, I highly encourage you to not engage EA CO AS since he's most likely a troll. If he/it isn't, I'm going to venture to guess that it's a company mole attempting to negotiate directly with pilots. We all realize how much the company loves metrics and data collection.

I also suggest putting the management troll on your ignore list. Makes for a peaceful life.

I don’t know much about Alaska, fly out of the northeast. Does Alaska really have no scope at all?

He's one of those airliners.net armchair experts. Just ignore him and he will go back to that dork site.

Better start reading then.

Jetblue has a ton of outsourcing via codesharing. I’m at Spirit and we have unlimited codesharing in our scope language. With the ULCC model expanding to wide bodies it’s a gaping hole in our section 1 that needs to to be closed.

Alaska does that too.

We're kind of like a travel agency/booking service.

PIMP
 

There are girls who have been around the block and then there are tour guides.
Alaska is a tour guide...

We are a genuine, straight up, old school prostitute. Alaska will do anything with anybody for money.

My nomination for post of the year. . .That is some funny stuff. . .

If you have great pay now and no scope, think about what you'll have in 20 years...


What leverage exactly do you expect to have at the bargaining table going forward?

We have no leverage, thanks to a pilot group that never bothered to fight for it years ago

I was kind of wondering if I'd get a rebuttal from the OP.

It appears not.

Sad but true. This has been the mentality for far too long and this is exactly why were are in the position we are in now and why we have little to no leverage in 2020.

Scope is within the realm of possibility and might not even cost that much in 2020. Reason being the pilot shortage, majors will have enough trouble recruiting the quality of applicants to which they are accustomed, to say nothing of their regional partners. Lack of scope only does them so much good if regionals can't staff, or operate safely with the staff they have. Code share is a different story.

They will of course extract a price for scope, because it may be worth more to the pilots now than it is to AAG.

But better to lock it in asap... the pilot shortage may not be perpetual.

Your last line nailed it. All it would take is Congress "amending" the ATP requirement, and what's old is new again...

We just got another threatening email about the Orange lanyards. But they still want us to work together to fix the problems they created.

Was that the VP message on the pilot web site? I tried to open it, but it didn't work.

Either TK doesn't know how to attach files, or they have pulled it for now.

I've been wearing mine. They are welcome to discipline me and remove me from flight status. We are so over-staffed that they can afford to do this rather easily.

Nevermind. I just got the E-Mail on Outlook.

I already texted one of my reps.

Just get an Alaska lanyard and take a sharpie to it like I saw one awesome ALK CA do to our orange lanyard.. "WE'RE #5!" emblazoned all over it.

Effing awesome. I gave the guy a high five.:D

This is only a 6 to 10 month delay in the training pipeline Compared To the 1,000 hour requirement we used to see. It’s been in place for a number of years now so probably just a slight deterrent to most people thinking about a career. If they were to amend the age 65 rule as well then the pilot shortage would decrease.

SCOPE...what’s the difference if you make 250 or 350 a year if you are on the street watching someone else fly your route. That’s why it’s always first in contract language.

EXACTLY. I've said it before and I'll say it again: We work for an entity of Alaska AIR GROUP...our management team does what is best for the AIR GROUP. If that means "expanding the capabilities" of OO and QX with larger aircraft capable of flying transcon then that is exactly what they'll do.

Once again, OO can't fly larger aircraft because of their scope agreements with the other airlines that have scope.

True. But that doesn't mean some other regional couldn't do it. But probably not today...

Most big regionals are probably bound by the same scope as OO. Bottom feeders suck, in all respects. While AAG might find a mesa to do it, how are they going to staff it better than QX? And does AAG really want their customers (excuse me, guests), exposed to the likes of that?

And nobody will be starting up any clean-slate regionals any time soon... way too cost prohibitive in this environment, between startup costs and the fact that you would NOT benefit from the usual zero-longevity labor costs... in order to attract pilots to a startup regional today, you would have to pay really, really big bucks to attract qualified PICs from other regionals. Those qualified PICs are either staying where they're at for QOL, or applying to legacies. There's no pool of experienced furloughed dudes/dudettes to man a startup right now.

But this will not always be the case... scope should not be taken lightly long-term.

Yes, not saying we do not need scope, we do. Just remember we are lucky we enjoy some 3rd party scope protection.

The time to fight for a better contract is now. Not in the past because it is and the past and not 2 years from now because that is too late.

Support you Union and your fellow pilots. AA got a pay raise outside of negotiations and it wasn't because management loved and appreciated them. They fought for it. If you have any friends at AA ask them how they did it.

When Alaska adds the 90 plus seaters to the route structure, a spun off version of Skywest will be doing it...The big 3 scope clauses bind Skywest inc...which includes the remnants of ASA and XJet. and of course Skywest mainline.....Nothing will prevent them from spooling up another airline rapidly outside of Skywest inc. We do not enjoy 3rd party scope at all....If we get it it will be from our flight attendants....Just finished a 3day trip and nary an orange lanyard to be seen except the two we were wearing...lots of sheepish looks from company lanyard men and women......The arbitrators got it right...We have not earned and dont deserve legacy pay and benefits....The Alaska pilots union is being renamed: Apologist Line Pilots Association

That’s sad to hear

Where are you going to find the qualified staff to do a startup regional airline right now? You'd have to compete on the open market for those people... paying enough to lure people to a startup alter-ego regional instead of a major???

Qualified people are not going to take a chance on a startup regional, they'll just go work for the big four and skip the low pay, RJ schedules, startup workrules, and alter-ego stigma.

We're talking initial certification of a new operating certificate, flying an airplane that nobodies every operated before.

Yes, I remember how zero pilots went to Compass to become street captains when it started up in the worst recession since 1929. We have nothing to worry about.

Ahh, the ol'e "Need not fear, they can't staff it even if they wanted to!" comfort blanket. Trust me, they will find a way to do so. They'll offer pay rates $20-$30 above the "industry standard" E-175 rates for both seats and voila, they'll have pilots. If SJS was strong back in the day when the CRJ-900 was new...imagine a UND/ERAU grad looking at the prospect of flying a CS-300 or E195-E2 right out of the gate for compensation far better than what they imagined it would be.

PWNflyer: Any agreement can be dismantled and done away with, especially when it comes to this matter. All it takes is a team of attorneys and a check...look at all of the "iron clad agreements" between regionals and mainline carriers that "ended early" due to a "mutual agreement" between the two parties. SKYW would LOVE to fly the larger RJ's, especially the E195-E2. AAG has the pocketbook and legal team to make any arrangement happen...

As for your comments re: supporting each other and working towards Contract 2020, I agree 1000%.

That's because there were very few opportunities for pilots at the time...

Nobody who's qualified to be a DEC at a startup regional is likely to leave their current job when they can sit tight and wait for the bigs to call.

I didn't say get comfortable, I said "get scope". But I don't think you need to lose sleep for the next two years.

Yeah sure you can get CFI's to do anything, but you can't do a startup airline with a startup jet with CFI's. You need experienced LCA and SIM guys. BTDT, the FAA is pretty picky about who they let do things like that.

Of course you can do it, but you're not saving any money if you have to pay pilots 80% of narrowbody rates to fly a plane that carries 60% of pax a NB can. Outsourcing doesn't work when there's a labor shortage, the existing regionals are fraying at the seams already. And the shortage hasn't even got warmed up yet.

The bigs are not trying to push the boundaries to do more outsourcing right now, they're trying to setup flow mechanisms to recruit pilots to man the regional flying they have today, and man mainline in a few years.

Trans States Holding has the MRJ (90 seats) on order and they're not bound to any size or weight limitations . Their management would be drooling over the chance to fly them painted in Alaska colors.

Some can't wear the orange lanyards because...probation.

pretty easy to tell the probies....they look scared and wear hats...again today...Not an orange lanyard but ours....And Tom Kemp for the win....I am sure as herd we have added value to his end of year bonus.....over before it started....looking forward to contract 2022

I wouldn't worry about TSA. I used to work for them. They can't even staff what they have right now.