|
Eh, the non-cons get a pay raise...good for them. I don't get all the angst every time they get a few pennies thrown at them. I'd prefer we just negotiate into the contract that we get X% pay raise annually, after the expiration of the contract.
|
Originally Posted by crewdawg
(Post 2880011)
Eh, the non-cons get a pay raise...good for them. I don't get all the angst every time they get a few pennies thrown at them. I'd prefer we just negotiate into the contract that we get X% pay raise annually, after the expiration of the contract.
|
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 2880005)
My pondering has let me imagine that the 5 raises since 2015 would have triggered 5 reviews and increased our pay RATES to industry average while maintaining our profit sharing and former language with regard to sick leave, trip coverage and every other concession that would not be, as we patiently waited for an acceptable PWA. You are correct that this is alternate history but there is nothing speculative about the rest of the company being limited to no wage increases unless there was a pilot increase while still conducting section 6 negotiations. Since then, the non-cons have had annual or better raises of 3-4% and returned to the pilot profit sharing plan. We nearly solidified a provision that negated the punitive nature of prolonged negotiation which is management’s primary leverage.
I’m dreaming, I know and I have to live with our collective choice and reality but it should never be forgotten what we gave up. I continue to think this was a huge one. I’m sure others have their own regrets. It struck me as strange that this is acknowledged publicly by the company when previously it was not a concern, but now is used to tout our above average compensation. Negotiations are on going and this propaganda would never make Deltanet if we were still getting raises without having settled. Maybe I’m the only one who thought a mechanism to not stagnate wages and continue raises was a TVM dream come true. Yes but the "industry average" was set by our contract. UAL matched us with their "Me Too" clause and AMR got a gratis raise from management that raised them toward our pay to keep the natives from getting too restless. So like I said - alternate history. IF we don't accept TA-2 who knows what the industry average would be because our TA-2 Set the industry standard. This whole line of thinking - That our contract is only industry standard is correct, but guess what we set the standard. WE didn't rise up to meet AMR and UAL - they rose up and met us. We could have gotten 15% more and if they match us guess what? Industry standard! Like I said - this is all speculation, what could have happened, maybe even what should have happened, but I would prefer to look forward. Scoop |
Originally Posted by crewdawg
(Post 2880011)
Eh, the non-cons get a pay raise...good for them. I don't get all the angst every time they get a few pennies thrown at them. I'd prefer we just negotiate into the contract that we get X% pay raise annually, after the expiration of the contract.
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2880153)
If you don’t get the angst you need to read a bit more carefully. Many of the Posters here have angst over everything. I wonder how some make it out of bed in the morning.
We've definitely got it good - don't get me wrong. But the trend line isn't in our favor. Thank goodness for our union and the inherent protections of organized labor - IMHO, that will at least slow inevitable qol degradation. DALPA is far from perfect but I'll take it in an instant over trying to fend for myself. Sailing, I don't know you but I suspect your life is pretty sweet. You're in the sunset years, with grandkids and who knows what else keeping your glass half full or better. While many of our more senior pilots are struggling to catch up after the lost decade, there are just as many sitting pretty with a healthy (if smaller than originally planned) nest egg, little to no actual debt, aging parents who actually have pensions and health care supplements and possibly an estate of significance to pass along, spouses with pensions of their own, social security that will likely continue unabated through death, etc. I know that's not everyone's situation, but it's not uncommon. It's also very different from where many of our younger folks sit, and they're right to try and preserve everything they currently have and seek to improve it where they can. Many of our newbies are sitting on mountains of debt themselves or in conjunction with their spouse. In comparison with two decades ago, their spouse is more likely to be working and less likely to be staying home to manage the household while daddy goes to fly his trips. The jobs those spouses have are less likely to have pensions or affordable health insurance. The college expenses they'll face are significantly larger than in the days of old, and jobs available to their kids who may not be interested in college are fewer and pay less with poorer benefits. Their aging parents are less likely to be financially independent, and more likely to require financial or other assistance. They're also much less likely to be sitting on any wealth or property of significance that might ultimately be passed down. Don't begrudge those with angst. Ignore them if you must, but legitimate complaints about the current state of affairs and particularly the trend lines going forward abound. You may not be pulling up the ladder, but it's definitely rusting out. Many of us are simply trying to reinforce it before that ladder collapses in dust. I'd love to think that whenever I reach your seniority and your age my qol life will be as good as yours is now. I suspect it won't. My inflation-adjusted paycheck may be similar (if I'm lucky), but that's of much less concern to me than just about everything else. I fully expect a productivity floor of sorts and difficulty dropping trips. The value of my and my family's travel benefits will likely have degraded significantly. I anticipate having less sick leave and more difficulty using it. My schedule will probably be more taxing on my body and I might have fewer avenues to improve it. If I choose or am forced onto reserve, I suspect I'll spend more time at work and less in actual reserve at home. What am I getting wrong here? For what reasons should our new hires or anyone entering this industry not have similar concerns? |
3b6 came out of POS 96.
First used for the 737-800 in ‘98. This is one reason why the 737 pays as close as it does to the 757. 3b6 again used for the 777 and 767-400 with negotiations starting in 99. United was below 200 bucks an hour at that time for the 777 when we settled. There was also a profit sharing conversion into that rate (and all pay rates) of 6% which is the max it could ever pay . I never heard anyone complain about that as the PS language was not as robust. (Leo would stroke writing checks with the current language) C2K it switched to 3b4. In that billion dollar deal, 3b6 was a no go item for the company. Although I am sure no one wanted to give it up, considering the deal and the huge gains, most felt it had served it purpose as a hedge coming out of a concessionary contract. Up until TA2, it had been triggered multiple times and had only paid pennies I think 1 time. Considering the track record of 3b4 and another billion dollar deal, should the MEC have walked away from negotiations and the NMB over this? Did we have them over a barrel? You can’t look at this stuff in a vacuum. When we had it, it seemed management was structuring raises to avoid it. Would this pay raise look different as well? It is much like the retirement issue and pay. People want to take the current contract pay and apply a DB that went away 13 years ago. Who knows what our pay/contract (as well as any of the other passenger carrier contracts) would look like if we still had a DB? Maybe the same, but I doubt it. Anyway, I know I know, any of the things that were traded in negotiations might have easily stayed if we just had a “real union,” but you also can’t discredit the opinion that negotiations might take much longer than many want to admit. (Which still doesn’t guarantee the perfect contract) Examples? The JV negotiations, reroute, DH. We are already a couple of years into those with no resolution in sight. I only use that as an example of time and “as long as it takes” may be quite a while. |
Originally Posted by crewdawg
(Post 2880011)
Eh, the non-cons get a pay raise...good for them. I don't get all the angst every time they get a few pennies thrown at them. I'd prefer we just negotiate into the contract that we get X% pay raise annually, after the expiration of the contract.
|
Originally Posted by TED74
(Post 2880171)
The average new hire is probably in his or her mid-thirties. With 30 years to go until retirement, they're right to be concerned about just about everything and they need to pay attention. I'm glad when they do, and it's informative to hear concerns about issues on here that haven't touched my life and career yet, but might down the road. 8 to 10 contracts worth of fat-trimming/cost savings/efficiency gains are likely to completely change the landscape here and across society... what are the odds our quality of life will trend better over that time period? Is there a model in another career that we should look to for inspiration in this shareholder-focused economy? Everywhere I look, I see quality-of-life sacrifices that the little people make while the upper crust of our society gets exponentially richer and gains more control of almost every system. One can only hope their position might at least be grasping on to the crust as it separates. What used to be had by a hard-working high school graduate (good schools, safe neighborhoods, affordable health care, time with family) now nearly requires a dual-income family and many more total hours at work per week. What one used to be able to afford on a single job now often demands second and third jobs in the gig economy.
We've definitely got it good - don't get me wrong. But the trend line isn't in our favor. Thank goodness for our union and the inherent protections of organized labor - IMHO, that will at least slow inevitable qol degradation. DALPA is far from perfect but I'll take it in an instant over trying to fend for myself. Sailing, I don't know you but I suspect your life is pretty sweet. You're in the sunset years, with grandkids and who knows what else keeping your glass half full or better. While many of our more senior pilots are struggling to catch up after the lost decade, there are just as many sitting pretty with a healthy (if smaller than originally planned) nest egg, little to no actual debt, aging parents who actually have pensions and health care supplements and possibly an estate of significance to pass along, spouses with pensions of their own, social security that will likely continue unabated through death, etc. I know that's not everyone's situation, but it's not uncommon. It's also very different from where many of our younger folks sit, and they're right to try and preserve everything they currently have and seek to improve it where they can. Many of our newbies are sitting on mountains of debt themselves or in conjunction with their spouse. In comparison with two decades ago, their spouse is more likely to be working and less likely to be staying home to manage the household while daddy goes to fly his trips. The jobs those spouses have are less likely to have pensions or affordable health insurance. The college expenses they'll face are significantly larger than in the days of old, and jobs available to their kids who may not be interested in college are fewer and pay less with poorer benefits. Their aging parents are less likely to be financially independent, and more likely to require financial or other assistance. They're also much less likely to be sitting on any wealth or property of significance that might ultimately be passed down. Don't begrudge those with angst. Ignore them if you must, but legitimate complaints about the current state of affairs and particularly the trend lines going forward abound. You may not be pulling up the ladder, but it's definitely rusting out. Many of us are simply trying to reinforce it before that ladder collapses in dust. I'd love to think that whenever I reach your seniority and your age my qol life will be as good as yours is now. I suspect it won't. My inflation-adjusted paycheck may be similar (if I'm lucky), but that's of much less concern to me than just about everything else. I fully expect a productivity floor of sorts and difficulty dropping trips. The value of my and my family's travel benefits will likely have degraded significantly. I anticipate having less sick leave and more difficulty using it. My schedule will probably be more taxing on my body and I might have fewer avenues to improve it. If I choose or am forced onto reserve, I suspect I'll spend more time at work and less in actual reserve at home. What am I getting wrong here? For what reasons should our new hires or anyone entering this industry not have similar concerns? I second your observation about the state of the American work force. The funneling of wealth to the upper echelons of society is only accelerating, and I think we’re going to see a drastically different world when I retire. |
Originally Posted by Extenda
(Post 2880295)
Great post. I’m very happy here and with 32 years left here and will strive to make it the best place to work.
I second your observation about the state of the American work force. The funneling of wealth to the upper echelons of society is only accelerating, and I think we’re going to see a drastically different world when I retire. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 2880304)
Its not just to the upper echelons. Its being funneled by them to the lower echelons as well for preservation of power to the detriment of middle and upper middle class labor, and to a scale so massive that you are ensconced well within the 1%, radically outnumbered, and expected to pay.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:58 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands