The difference between ER and 737 pay is of less concern to me than the difference between the ER and the A330/765. Without taking the time to run the math again, I'm pretty sure it's the largest percentage difference in the fleet.

 

I think we are talking past each other. I was referring to those on property and those already effected by those two events, not those yet on property.

 

Yes C2K required 300 less pilots with the work rule changes. I remember Dotty explaining that to me quite well. Prior to 9-11 the gap in hiring was to be short lived, after it wasn't. The business was quite leveraged going in to 2001 after the actions taken prior to C2K's signing.

In 1991, yes PanAm was bought and yes that was also the initial pause in hiring, but another "world" event deepened the effects of the stop in hiring.

The take away is that both large hiring cycles lasted about six years and stopped for about six years each. Just food for thought at we go in to an expected cycle that is to double both of these. Call it a combination of corporate action and world events, but both large hiring cycles and the time frame in between them was about six years. For all intents and purposes, the 2007-2008 waive about 770 pilots had a burp in 2010 that broke the trend line, but its been about six years since the last major hiring cycle as well. Again corporate action and world events collided. the 2010 deviation was explained in the base visits. The difference last time is no one was furloughed.


Its merely historical events and cycles that should be looked at as we move in to a second up contract (breaking historical trends btw) and the time frame we have until things may break. Its no more than using historical waves as one data point. It helps build perspective for all of us.

 

Surely you jest.....

2008:
NWA . . 757 - $144.41

NWA . . 330 - $161.52 (+$17.11)
DAL . . .757 - $159.98 (+$15.57)

Using the rate YOU had at NWA for the 757, it definitely wasn't a WB payrate; I completely agree!

The DAL contract certainly seemed to have the 757 pay in line with your historical definition of WB pay differential.

 

No worries. I agree with your main point on the need to think strategically and also the fact that the music can stop at any moment.

Scoop

 

The same thing applies to the 767-400 which generated the A330 rate in the merger. We were able to negotiate a rate higher then the norm based on the increased efficiency of the newer airframes. The 767-400, 777 and 737NG all got the higher rates.

 

Do you work in management or ALPA?
Or both?

 

Wide body vs narrow body pay, right?


How does that turn into a north vs south deferential?

 

This is an interesting point--the generational gap in "what matters" when it comes to compensation.

Several studies out there--seems like the "baby boomers" are generally happy to make as much money as possible, even if it means working more. Later generations seek good money, it's true, but also value other forms of compensation very highly--especially time off.

Those are some broad generalizations, certainly. But suffice to say it's not all about straight cash anymore for many younger guys. ALPA ought to consider these generational differences...but it's pretty unlikely when all the fat cats are baby boomers.

 

Gszg is attempting to revise a set of events that he had no part of and spin it to be something it is and was not. His premise was incorrect and so his result was incorrect.

It's not a N/S thing, it's a "gszg is wrong" thing. Sorry if it came across that way. 99.9% of the unified pilot group doesn't measure by the size of their pay rates... For some reason gszg feels the need to make arguments that don't work in reality, but he's pretty much batsh!t crazy so it was my mistake to even address any of his rant.

My apologies if any offense was taken.