I have a bigger problem with a new hire making less money flying an MD-88 than I make flying the exact same aircraft. Longevity should not even be in the equation anymore. It handcuffs us to our particular airline thus reducing our leverage to the point that we are willing to take ridiculous pay cuts to avoid starting over at year 1.

 

Down-gauging relative seniority due to a merger concerns me a little bit more.

One can be fixed on the next contract. (Pay.)

The other last an entire career. (SLI)

 

I get that to a point. However, what would your proposal be to reward those that have been here awhile? Do you really believe that a newhire should make the same coin as a guy that has been here 25 years? If you are using that as justification to keep the bigger pays more mantra, how do you propose luring quality newbies to DAL? UAL has 3 times the number of super premium flying we have, and retirements/growth going forward will blow ours out of the water. It's mostly -not all- about the Benjamins once you are in the door, and if a new guy is gonna spend 12 years in a super premium acft vs 3... how can you sell that?

 

I agree. That one is a toughie. Especially if it is a company that only flies a single type aircraft that is low in our fleet. (Not to worry though, with all the orders, it is rapidly becoming one of the largest fleets).

 

I believe the new hire should make the same as the guy that has been here 25 years if they are both in the same category. They are doing the exact same job. We are more than experienced by the time we get here. I never believed in a pilot starting over every time he/she switches jobs. That is unique to our industry. It keeps wages down and keeps us desperate to making sure our company survives. I believe the 25 year guy is rewarded enough with everything else seniority related (vacation, schedule, etc.). I am not sure I will ever fly the bigger metal. I just don't think longevity pay is the answer. It is not my job to worry about pilot retention. If the pay rises enough, quality applicants will apply. You and I both know the pilot shortage is a farce.

 

The 737-900's will be ok, but they aren't 757/767's, that's for sure.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree. I can't think of any job where a newbie makes the same as a more experienced guy except sports, but that doesn't count. Interesting that you believe you won't fly the bigger metal. What if management bought 50 777s? Would you then? Why do we insist on those handcuffs?

 

I think what will be really bad is the loss of the 2L door for boarding. That is very nice for the first class passengers, and it also makes for a quicker turn around because it can be boarded while the cleaners are still in coach... How could we get Boeing to tool up that line again?

 

Hell, the MD88 and MD90 should've had a 2L door, it should've been a no brainer on the 739.

Part of the benefit on the 2L door on the 757 is the lobby area it creates even if using the 1L door. the 739/88/90, its a straight long aisle. When the 88/90s are deboarding you have these massive breaks of 3-5 minutes where nobody comes off because one slow person is creeping up the aisle. Then they get off and 80-130 people come off.

It'll all be somewhat mitigated if they do 1 hour turns at a minimum. IF they try the 40 minute turns, well, they'll need to be some push back. Because 40 minute turns only works if its 180 businessmen who fly 3-5 times a week. I've had 40-45 minute turns from PBI-DTW on the 88, wanna take a guess how many WCs we get on a PBI-DTW turn?

And 80... whats up with your little witch having short hair?!? She does better with the long hair, see...

 

I strongly disagree...and it flies in the face of economics.


Should a new lawyer make the same as a partner?

Should a new-PhD assistant professor make the same as a "full" professor?

The bottom line is that newbies into many industries work much harder, but make much less, than the "old heads." This system actually incentivises the old heads to stick around. There is never a problem finding "newbies."

I do acknowledge in the example that I gave that you can move "laterally" (i.e famous professor is "stolen" by another university and starts at the top of the heap over at his new school).

But I am sure that we attempted to eliminate longevity into the pay considerations, management would want the old guys to make LESS, not the new guys make more.