Cue the argument that going forward our average aircraft size is going up. 717 replaced with A220’s, MD88/90 with A321’s and 767’s with A330’s. Given gate and ATC constraints in the US and many other parts of the world average fleet size is going to continue going up. It’s a free raise for the pilot group that never has to be negotiated.
When I attended in command a long time ago we were in 777 negotiations. The CEO addressed the talks and said the 777 could support a 500 an hour rate with its revenue generation. He followed that statement saying “However if I agree to that ALPA will demand 350 an hour on the 737 and the airframe can’t support that.”

Because you are... A captain scale and an FO scale. Two scales. You have said that yourself multiple times. I’m not arguing they should be the same in this theoretical scenario. What I pointed out is: another poster said they were waiting for the WB and the upgrade for the pay. You said it would be moo with longevity pay. I said you couldn’t say it would be moo because your longevity pay plan pays differently left seat and right seat. So the original poster would still be waiting for that pay raise that comes with the upgrade. Therefore, the point was not moo.

It is an interesting exercise. I ran the numbers a few years back and the seniority based pay rate would be just about 757 pay. So, everyone that is “junior” to the 757 would get a raise and everyone senior would get a cut. (Obviously those pilots would have to be grandfathered in)

Of course you also get into expectations. Since a blended rate would be lower than our current top rate, are the pilots that aren’t flying that equipment, but can hold it in the very near future now stuck at the blended rate?

It also seems like people misjudge what it will do to them. It seems like there is a lot of “this will be great, I can fly the A220 and never leave.” Can you? You might be bumped right out of that seat and now flying Lagos because the pilot who was chasing the money would prefer to stay within a couple of time zones of home.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying there isn’t workable, but there is always an opposite reaction and that result may not be what the advocate expected.

I remember seeing a lot of young 747 capt's and a lot of old 737 guys at Lufthansa.

Um I guess... I don't get your point really. I think you are trying to make something that isn't there. If, in your example the pilot wanted to make more money, the ONLY thing he has to do is upgrade to the left seat and keep breathing. It's far better than what we have had for decades.

Principal payments are a use of cash but reduces payables on the balance sheet. As an example we had $8.2B in restructuring expenses in 2020 that helped create a $12.4B loss which created a tax credit. There is probably more restructuring and other expenses or other revenue reductions (Virgin) that are discretionary enough to make 2021 GAAP compliant AND have the P&L they want.

The 737/320 would go unbelievably senior.

Your premise of the average/median pay is correct if the payscale is lineal. The issue is the transition to it. Once it is implemented you could do that, but I would actually have the yearly increases higher for the first 15 years since the FO pay would still be based off of it, but after that they could taper down somewhat. So far the only downside I have seen is when we slide backwards and furloughs become necessary. There is no lowest paying category to displace to and I believe the junior pilots would be relatively evenly spread throughout the fleet. We'd have to come up with a mechanism to get around that. Heck we pay guys for doing nothing anymore, so there's that. Maybe furloughs are a thing of the past.

The point was, your fix-all suggestion didn’t fix the issue presented by the other poster.

Yes it does. It is silly to think there should be one scale for both captains and FOs.

You can think whatever is silly that you want. In this case though, you are disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. A pilot would still be waiting for the raise that comes with the left seat. Longevity pay that is split at all does not make the original point moo no matter how hard you try to talk around the point.

I’m not advocating for left seat and right seat to pay the same. You can continue to try to argue with me about that in an effort to make yourself right, but that’s a different point than what I made.