Alaska thread for Alaska pilots...
06-16-2015, 06:01 AM
#431
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 343
Originally Posted by Packrat
Can't blame anyone but the rank and file for the quality of your LEC reps. You voted them in. Then they voted for the MEC guys.
I guess expecting the MEC & NC not to sell us a bill of goods was not at all realistic.
06-16-2015, 06:55 AM
#432
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: Supine
Posts: 251
Originally Posted by ForeverJunior
I guess expecting the MEC & NC not to sell us a bill of goods was not at all realistic.
I think a big problem we have is the way they do the Wilson polling. It is OK to ask about work rules, layover hotels, retirement goals, etc., but they shouldn't ask about pay rates. As soon as that average number exists, you know it is leaked to management one way or another. John H. certainly knows what the number was when he was on the MEC. I don't think they should ask us what pay raise percentage we desire, because then management will know what that number is. Rather they should tell the negotiating committee to get the best deal they can and let the chips fall where they may during a ratification vote. There should be some uncertainty on the part of management whether a vote will pass or not. In 2018, we will be what, 25% behind Delta for 737-900? Our MEC last time tried to tell us we shouldn't expect Delta rates because their wide bodies subsidize the pay scales of their narrow bodies. I say hogwash. How many training events does one retirement trigger at Delta vs. Alaska? Who gets to reap the benefits of having a single fleet type? Alaska management does in that case. Are there costs to having a single fleet type and who bears those costs? At Delta, a pilot can choose to remain in the 737, thereby enhancing his/her bidding seniority but sacrificing pay in the process. They choose to stay in the 737 for more seniority but less pay than advancing to widebodies. Do Alaska pilots have the ability to make that choice? No. The company reaps the benefits of having a single fleet type, but the pilots bear the cost. For that reason, our pay should always be higher for 737 when comparing to an airline with widebodies as well. The Delta MEC should be the ones saying to their pilots, "Look, you aren't going to get Alaska 737 rates because that's all they have and they have much lower training costs than we do." You can compare Alaska to Southwest, but comparing our rates to an airline with a mixed fleet is an apples/oranges discussion.
06-16-2015, 07:09 AM
#434
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by Singlecoil
It isn't realistic. I've come to realize that the MEC exists to get a ratifiable contract. Which when you think about it, is the same goal as management. When interviewing candidates for the position of MEC chairman, the one question they should be asked is, "Are you willing to lead this pilot group through a successful strike?" Is that question asked? I don't know, but I don't think so. Nobody on the MEC wants their cellphones blowing up on day 29 of a 30 day cooling off period. They exist to get a deal. Less stress for them and they get to tell the pilots, "Well, you voted for it." That would explain why the sold the last deal so hard and voted 8-0 to send it out for a vote.
I think a big problem we have is the way they do the Wilson polling. It is OK to ask about work rules, layover hotels, retirement goals, etc., but they shouldn't ask about pay rates. As soon as that average number exists, you know it is leaked to management one way or another. John H. certainly knows what the number was when he was on the MEC. I don't think they should ask us what pay raise percentage we desire, because then management will know what that number is. Rather they should tell the negotiating committee to get the best deal they can and let the chips fall where they may during a ratification vote. There should be some uncertainty on the part of management whether a vote will pass or not. In 2018, we will be what, 25% behind Delta for 737-900? Our MEC last time tried to tell us we shouldn't expect Delta rates because their wide bodies subsidize the pay scales of their narrow bodies. I say hogwash. How many training events does one retirement trigger at Delta vs. Alaska? Who gets to reap the benefits of having a single fleet type? Alaska management does in that case. Are there costs to having a single fleet type and who bears those costs? At Delta, a pilot can choose to remain in the 737, thereby enhancing his/her bidding seniority but sacrificing pay in the process. They choose to stay in the 737 for more seniority but less pay than advancing to widebodies. Do Alaska pilots have the ability to make that choice? No. The company reaps the benefits of having a single fleet type, but the pilots bear the cost. For that reason, our pay should always be higher for 737 when comparing to an airline with widebodies as well. The Delta MEC should be the ones saying to their pilots, "Look, you aren't going to get Alaska 737 rates because that's all they have and they have much lower training costs than we do." You can compare Alaska to Southwest, but comparing our rates to an airline with a mixed fleet is an apples/oranges discussion.
I think a big problem we have is the way they do the Wilson polling. It is OK to ask about work rules, layover hotels, retirement goals, etc., but they shouldn't ask about pay rates. As soon as that average number exists, you know it is leaked to management one way or another. John H. certainly knows what the number was when he was on the MEC. I don't think they should ask us what pay raise percentage we desire, because then management will know what that number is. Rather they should tell the negotiating committee to get the best deal they can and let the chips fall where they may during a ratification vote. There should be some uncertainty on the part of management whether a vote will pass or not. In 2018, we will be what, 25% behind Delta for 737-900? Our MEC last time tried to tell us we shouldn't expect Delta rates because their wide bodies subsidize the pay scales of their narrow bodies. I say hogwash. How many training events does one retirement trigger at Delta vs. Alaska? Who gets to reap the benefits of having a single fleet type? Alaska management does in that case. Are there costs to having a single fleet type and who bears those costs? At Delta, a pilot can choose to remain in the 737, thereby enhancing his/her bidding seniority but sacrificing pay in the process. They choose to stay in the 737 for more seniority but less pay than advancing to widebodies. Do Alaska pilots have the ability to make that choice? No. The company reaps the benefits of having a single fleet type, but the pilots bear the cost. For that reason, our pay should always be higher for 737 when comparing to an airline with widebodies as well. The Delta MEC should be the ones saying to their pilots, "Look, you aren't going to get Alaska 737 rates because that's all they have and they have much lower training costs than we do." You can compare Alaska to Southwest, but comparing our rates to an airline with a mixed fleet is an apples/oranges discussion.
06-16-2015, 04:09 PM
#435
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 396
Originally Posted by jamesrhatcher
You need to step up to the plate and show the ALPA boys what a real rep looks like.
06-18-2015, 08:58 AM
#436
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Position: Wicked Artsy, Moderately Fartsy
Posts: 194
Originally Posted by gooddeal
Humbly put...I see 6 distinct characteristics within the pilot group (ranked smallest to largest):
- Union reps: always quick to defend what they do and justify how they do it. Truth is, in an labor group that's all about more for less, it's just one avenue to gain while usurping seniority. So if you can get yours there, go for it I guess...can't hate that system as long as you can claim your stake there too. Want it changed? Get yourself elected and make the changes...can't wait to see the system improve.
- Over age 60 pilots: soaking up the cream of the cream under the current system; barely affected by union reps, management or check pilots. Free to fly like its 1999 and usually worst offenders of the statement "I'm pretty much a 'by the book' guy". Classiest moments are boisterous complaints of flying 1.5x Premium Pay, overlaid on vacation pay but picked up on Saturday or Sunday....boo hoo.
- Ages 50-55 pilots below top 50 seniority: could be the bitterest bracket in the group. Should've had theirs by now, not made whole post-Kasher, can't hold weekends off still. How many position reports left until LIH do I have left to endure some of the blackest hearts in the cockpit? LIH, KOA, OGG at $200+/hr on a day that touches a weekend sounds a lot better than any a.m. show for OAK-ABQ-TUL-STL-MDW...but I probably do not have the big picture. Oh, you still have a retirement? Cool beans man....oddly you're not worried about scope protection...noted.
- Hired post-Kasher thru age 65 enactment: battle hardened and accepted life as it is. I have to get less while doing more? FML....at least you people in front of me had time in the sun getting paid with trip touching and the likes. We fear and expect nothing...just hope someday it will improve.
- New hires circa 2013: rose colored glasses and for good reason too. Came in under newest contract, only seen growth and expansion, record profits, only with the threat of not receiving the 8th JD Power award. Wear a hat? "I'll wear two, sir!" They are the future of the company and still believing they won the lottery...hope they never lose that momentum.
- Everybody else: meatiest part of the group who show up, do their job and go home. Less about PA announcements or single-engine taxi and more about flying that safe jet. Keepers of the motto "Don't fix what isn't broken" and bored to tears being managed with the lens brought on by the worst 2% offenders. Accustomed to the frequent visits by the Good Idea Fairy from management into the FOM or FH and usually shrug off its impact. Once more unto the breach, dear friends...
Still a good place to work, regardless of your group. Anything I may complain about has about 1.5% total weight compared with idea of working elsewhere. The grass isn't greener, just sometimes talked about more. Just make the way we do our jobs easier and maybe management show up at gates around the system and tell crews good job, even for ordinary events. (Because right now if you show up at a gate, would likely think the worst, first).
I'm probably wrong...fire away...I'm logging in to buy a new free hat now.
- Union reps: always quick to defend what they do and justify how they do it. Truth is, in an labor group that's all about more for less, it's just one avenue to gain while usurping seniority. So if you can get yours there, go for it I guess...can't hate that system as long as you can claim your stake there too. Want it changed? Get yourself elected and make the changes...can't wait to see the system improve.
- Over age 60 pilots: soaking up the cream of the cream under the current system; barely affected by union reps, management or check pilots. Free to fly like its 1999 and usually worst offenders of the statement "I'm pretty much a 'by the book' guy". Classiest moments are boisterous complaints of flying 1.5x Premium Pay, overlaid on vacation pay but picked up on Saturday or Sunday....boo hoo.
- Ages 50-55 pilots below top 50 seniority: could be the bitterest bracket in the group. Should've had theirs by now, not made whole post-Kasher, can't hold weekends off still. How many position reports left until LIH do I have left to endure some of the blackest hearts in the cockpit? LIH, KOA, OGG at $200+/hr on a day that touches a weekend sounds a lot better than any a.m. show for OAK-ABQ-TUL-STL-MDW...but I probably do not have the big picture. Oh, you still have a retirement? Cool beans man....oddly you're not worried about scope protection...noted.
- Hired post-Kasher thru age 65 enactment: battle hardened and accepted life as it is. I have to get less while doing more? FML....at least you people in front of me had time in the sun getting paid with trip touching and the likes. We fear and expect nothing...just hope someday it will improve.
- New hires circa 2013: rose colored glasses and for good reason too. Came in under newest contract, only seen growth and expansion, record profits, only with the threat of not receiving the 8th JD Power award. Wear a hat? "I'll wear two, sir!" They are the future of the company and still believing they won the lottery...hope they never lose that momentum.
- Everybody else: meatiest part of the group who show up, do their job and go home. Less about PA announcements or single-engine taxi and more about flying that safe jet. Keepers of the motto "Don't fix what isn't broken" and bored to tears being managed with the lens brought on by the worst 2% offenders. Accustomed to the frequent visits by the Good Idea Fairy from management into the FOM or FH and usually shrug off its impact. Once more unto the breach, dear friends...
Still a good place to work, regardless of your group. Anything I may complain about has about 1.5% total weight compared with idea of working elsewhere. The grass isn't greener, just sometimes talked about more. Just make the way we do our jobs easier and maybe management show up at gates around the system and tell crews good job, even for ordinary events. (Because right now if you show up at a gate, would likely think the worst, first).
I'm probably wrong...fire away...I'm logging in to buy a new free hat now.
I'm guessing that with a 'generous' pay increase of 15% over 5 years would be voted yes by almost every pilot with less than 6 yrs on property remaining...regardless of other concessions. Defining the meaty middle of the pack on viewpoints is the tough metric I think.
06-23-2015, 07:25 AM
#437
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 343
Anyone have the latest intel on retirement numbers? Last I heard, company was planning for 98 this year. I've also heard 100/year for the next 3-4 years.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
06-23-2015, 11:33 AM
#438
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 279
I've heard the Company is watching about 80 guys this year. Of course, as mentioned, a rate change could sway bit more to take the plunge.
Originally Posted by ForeverJunior
Anyone have the latest intel on retirement numbers? Last I heard, company was planning for 98 this year. I've also heard 100/year for the next 3-4 years.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
06-23-2015, 11:35 AM
#439
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,378
Originally Posted by ForeverJunior
Anyone have the latest intel on retirement numbers? Last I heard, company was planning for 98 this year. I've also heard 100/year for the next 3-4 years.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
Of course, interest rates play a huge role in this. If they tick up towards the end of the year, we could expect a mass exodus.
07-01-2015, 11:49 AM
#440
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Position: Wicked Artsy, Moderately Fartsy
Posts: 194
Happy Hat Day 🎩
On the other hand I repulse the idea that a new war is inevitable; still more that it is imminent. It is because I am sure that our fortunes are still in our own hands and that we hold the power to save the future, that I feel the duty to speak out now that I have the occasion and the opportunity to do so. I do not believe that [Air Group] desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here to-day while time remains, is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all [bases]. Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a settlement, and the longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our dangers will become.
-Sir Winston Churchill
-Sir Winston Churchill
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
