Pay bump.
Any of our resident PWA nerds come up with a % of what the UAL inspired pay bump will be here at the Big D?
|
Originally Posted by Boatbuilder
(Post 3670539)
Any of our resident PWA nerds come up with a % of what the UAL inspired pay bump will be here at the Big D?
|
Originally Posted by tennisguru
(Post 3670543)
2%. Filler
|
Originally Posted by Boatbuilder
(Post 3670544)
Thanks, I didn’t have our PWA handy,
|
Originally Posted by 170Till5
(Post 3670550)
is this for all years of pay or just top pay?
|
|
UA and DL will have identical pay. 1% higher than these tables.
https://i.ibb.co/q15xPLp/IMG-6865.jp...order="0"></a> https://i.ibb.co/QpqbhPv/IMG-6864.jp...order="0"></a> |
Originally Posted by Boatbuilder
(Post 3670544)
Thanks, I didn’t have our PWA handy,
|
Originally Posted by 170Till5
(Post 3670550)
is this for all years of pay or just top pay?
|
Originally Posted by DWC CAP10 USAF
(Post 3670582)
Negotiator Notepad 23-04 talks about how the me too clause works and shows an example of the math.
|
Originally Posted by Big E 757
(Post 3671708)
So can we use A380 rates? Highest rate right? 🤣 When does it take effect? If they get retro to 01/01/23, will our 2% be retro? I know these are silly questions, especially #1, I already know that answer, but seriously, if theirs is voted in and takes effect as of 01/01/23, ours should be retro too.
|
Originally Posted by Big E 757
(Post 3671708)
So can we use A380 rates? Highest rate right? 🤣 When does it take effect? If they get retro to 01/01/23, will our 2% be retro? I know these are silly questions, especially #1, I already know that answer, but seriously, if theirs is voted in and takes effect as of 01/01/23, ours should be retro too.
WRT to your other question check out PWA 3.B.5 note 2 |
Originally Posted by Big E 757
(Post 3671708)
.......if theirs is voted in and takes effect as of 01/01/23, ours should be retro too.
|
Originally Posted by tmtbiker
(Post 3671792)
The picture of the pay rates posted literally says Date Of Signing right on the top. So what makes you think they're effective as of 01/01/23? What makes you think we'd get retro based on the higher rates? They're in effect going forward from... Say it with me... Date Of Signing.
And I think his comment was in jest. |
Originally Posted by TegridyFarms
(Post 3672071)
Trying to look smart…. End up looking like an idiot. Ours were all DOS too, with retro being separate. Two separate animals.
And I think his comment was in jest. DOS was March 2, 2023. From what I’ve been able to gather, UA’s retro mirrors ours to the penny from 1/1/23 to DOS, and then increases by 1% on DOS. Does anyone remember what kind of retro UA and AA were willing to accept prior to the DL deal? |
So, to clarify:
|
Originally Posted by FleetSnarl
(Post 3739270)
So, to clarify:
I also think the 737 max-10 will pay 321neo/757 rates at Delta. United’s does not. Again, Delta will lead the way as usual. |
Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
(Post 3739353)
I believe Delta’s pay rates will probably exceed United’s in 2027 when they get a new contract. Delta almost always negotiates industry leading pay rates.
I also think the 737 max-10 will pay 321neo/757 rates at Delta. United’s does not. Again, Delta will lead the way as usual. |
Originally Posted by FL370esq
(Post 3739615)
Over/under on the 350-1000 getting "super premium widebody pay" and topping the current 350/330/765 rates if that rumor ever comes to fruition? Or....does it get dumped on as another 350 variant à la the 330-200/-300/-900?
|
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
(Post 3739626)
I would assume it will pay WB pay. I’m not sure if we have an argument to require a new rate negotiation, since it just lists A350 on the pay scale, and does not specify -900
|
Originally Posted by FL370esq
(Post 3739615)
Over/under on the 350-1000 getting "super premium widebody pay" and topping the current 350/330/765 rates if that rumor ever comes to fruition? Or....does it get dumped on as another 350 variant à la the 330-200/-300/-900?
Originally Posted by PilotBases
(Post 3739667)
Id say if the -1000 gets flown at -900 rates, the 320 series should all be at Neo rates, or at least the 321ceos.
|
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
(Post 3739692)
I’m gonna amend my answer a bit after reading section 3E and the definitions section. We should have a case to negotiate a new rate. Whether or not that rate is the same as the other WB rates is TBD.
|
Originally Posted by First Break
(Post 3739760)
Agree. Considering the A350-1000 didn’t even exist when the current A350 rate was negotiated, it’s fair to assume a new rate is required. But it wouldn’t shock me to find out this management team would ignore that blatant fact and make an arbitrator force their hand. After all, it’s not a violation till the arbitrator says so.
|
Originally Posted by TNDeltaFlyboy
(Post 3740165)
The pay tables make no mention of A350-900 or -1000. I can all but promise the company will say all variants will pay the listed rate until the next cycle. In the contract signed in 2016, the 321NEO was annotated at the bottom of the pay tables specfically saying its rates would be negotiated once on property. That kind of statement doesn exist in the current PWA for the -1000, unfortunately.
That Malone guy is the gift that keeps on giving. |
Originally Posted by FL370esq
(Post 3739615)
Over/under on the 350-1000 getting "super premium widebody pay" and topping the current 350/330/765 rates if that rumor ever comes to fruition? Or....does it get dumped on as another 350 variant à la the 330-200/-300/-900?
|
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 3741241)
It will pay the same.
If new engines on an existing "make and model number" can drive that process (321NEO) it seems more than reasonable that a longer variant would as well. Just because the scale says "350" doesn't mean it automatically covers any and all variants. What if they made a stretched 380 and called it the 350-2000 (or better yet, the A220-5000), would that be the magical loophole that sneaks it in under an existing column? While that's not likely to happen and it'll be called an "A350" it will also get a different dash number (-1000) so how is that not going to be considered a new aircraft for pay purposes? Or was there something pre-agreed upon with our "blended" WB rate that was already agreed upon for this specific, and larger, sub variant? If not, it seems like the 3.E. clause would still apply. If not who not? If it is applied, we could still choose to roll that pay bump proportionatly into the existing WB pay if we wanted to, which would mean "it pays the same" but there would still be captured value in that new model regardless. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 3741251)
…Or was there something pre-agreed upon with our "blended" WB rate that was already agreed upon for this specific, and larger, sub variant?
If not, it seems like the 3.E. clause would still apply. If not who not? |
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 3741241)
It will pay the same.
|
Originally Posted by FangsF15
(Post 3741254)
No, 3.E would be triggered. It would simply result in the rate being the same as the rest of the WB pay band. I’m sure some will say that’s defeatest.
|
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 3741241)
It will pay the same.
I have no idea what it will pay but I am positive about two things. If it pays the standard WB rates the Pilots that fly it will scream like stuck pigs that they are getting royally screwed. If it pays a super premium rate the other WB Pilots will scream like stuck pigs that they are getting royally screwed. Merry Christmas you filthy animals! :D Scoop |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 3741332)
I have no idea what it will pay but I am positive about two things.
If it pays the standard WB rates the Pilots that fly it will scream like stuck pigs that they are getting royally screwed. If it pays a super premium rate the other WB Pilots will scream like stuck pigs that they are getting royally screwed. Merry Christmas you filthy animals! :D Scoop |
Originally Posted by m3113n1a1
(Post 3741372)
God this is the most true statement I've ever heard 😂
|
Originally Posted by First Break
(Post 3741451)
Dont forget the 3rd truism, whereby the 767 is “thrown under the bus”
|
Originally Posted by First Break
(Post 3741451)
Dont forget the 3rd truism, whereby the 767 is “thrown under the bus”
|
Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis
(Post 3741594)
Or “Why don’t we get holiday pay for Presidents’ Day?!?!”
|
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3741610)
Yeah, but gotta admit there’s a double standard for holidays. We should get holiday pay on all the holidays where scheduling changes are restricted. They are either holidays requiring special treatment or they are not.
|
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
(Post 3741612)
agree with this. Getting holiday pay in the contract was a good start. Now let’s align it with all APD holidays
|
I can't believe LABOR day doesn't get holiday pay. What a slap in the face to the most important LABOR group at the company.
|
Originally Posted by First Break
(Post 3741451)
Dont forget the 3rd truism, whereby the 767 is “thrown under the bus”
And the 717/220...
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
(Post 3741612)
agree with this. Getting holiday pay in the contract was a good start. Now let’s align it with all APD holidays
Agreed. Any day I can't move reserve days with proper coverage, should pay holiday pay. But I'm pretty happy with the start the union got with holiday pay. Something to build on next time. Ther hve been some pretty lucrative GS go out this Christmas. DH out late on Christmas eve and fly home early Christmas day....1 flying leg and 1.5 block for 31.5 hours of pay. Most years, I could have easily flown that and not even come close to interupting holiday plans. |
Originally Posted by chrisreedrules
(Post 3741637)
Or how about an entire trip that touches the holiday pays 200%…
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:26 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands