E190
12-26-2013, 04:57 AM
#12
Underpaid...
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: French-Canadian
Posts: 2,101
Do we really think that the pay disparity between group I and II is enough to make up the lost of revenue by having less seats. Last I checked the E190 has a higher cost per seat mile than the Bus. Also look at how AA is going to change the flying schedule in summer 2014, they are going back to waves, this is likely to lead to less frequency and larger airplanes.
12-26-2013, 05:26 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 220
Originally Posted by Andrew_VT
Not only is the pay scale way less, but if you read the fine print of the MOU it must stay that way for "10 years or 2 contract cycles".
Also, it's not just E-190s that apply to group 1, it's anything up to 118 seats!
Therefore, in conclusion, we're getting a crap-ton of group 1 airplanes.
Also, it's not just E-190s that apply to group 1, it's anything up to 118 seats!
Therefore, in conclusion, we're getting a crap-ton of group 1 airplanes.
You can be sure that 99% of the 75% of the US pilots who approved the MOU did not read the fine print.
They only looked at the pay rates, then voted "Yes".
Just as Parker expected them to do.
12-26-2013, 05:31 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,294
I read the fine print and thought "This is a huge roll of the dice. The whole contract gone for a 15 page document." The thing was, it was going away anyway. Parker was completely going around USAPA and the US pilots. With no MOU we would have been at the same place just a year or two later.
Most west pilots I know voted it for it strictly for the Nic. They(you?) really gave up some good contract provisions.
A lot of folks thought we had a ton of leverage with the CofC. I thought the company could have gotten around that, but we did have to ability to prevent code sharing. What all that was worth, who knows? Our pilot group was/is too dysfunctional to know.
Most west pilots I know voted it for it strictly for the Nic. They(you?) really gave up some good contract provisions.
A lot of folks thought we had a ton of leverage with the CofC. I thought the company could have gotten around that, but we did have to ability to prevent code sharing. What all that was worth, who knows? Our pilot group was/is too dysfunctional to know.
12-26-2013, 05:33 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,294
Originally Posted by meyers9163
The E190 is a great pilots plane....
12-26-2013, 06:51 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Hot tub for now
Posts: 1,203
Originally Posted by meyers9163
Ah I hadn't a clue.... The E190 is a great pilots plane.... Group one pay obviously isn't great but right now if you don't want to be group one you most likely can by the end of your first year...... I know things change but for the time being this is nice.
Plus does group one get pay parity review? What companies do we compare it against? B6?
Plus does group one get pay parity review? What companies do we compare it against? B6?
12-26-2013, 07:31 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Originally Posted by meyers9163
Plus does group one get pay parity review? What companies do we compare it against? B6?
12-26-2013, 08:12 AM
#18
You scratched my anchor
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,878
Originally Posted by Andrew_VT
Not only is the pay scale way less, but if you read the fine print of the MOU it must stay that way for "10 years or 2 contract cycles".
12-26-2013, 08:29 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,214
Originally Posted by seafeye
So you vote a big YES to the concessions at PSA and now you think you deserve pay parity?
AAG will grow PSA and shrink eagle, while trying to keep as much pilots in the regionals forever.
12-26-2013, 08:33 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Originally Posted by Al Czervik
Can you post the language? Other posts disagree with this.
4. Equipment Group Pay Relationship Neither party shall, without the written consent of the other party, seek to modify the pay relationship (i.e. ratio) set forth in this Section 3 between Group I and Groups II - V through the processes of the Railway Labor Act for a period of two (2) contract cycles or ten (10) years from January 1, 2013, whichever is later.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
