Same thing will happen if/when they make the 330/350 the same category.

When you were "experiencing" this before, was your company retiring half the seniority list in the amount of time that we will be? I'm just curious. Mandatory retirements are the one thing we can count on. Pilots WILL leave at age 65, and they WILL be leaving in droves. And they tend to be at the top of the list too btw.

You guys that are beating this drum need to empirically prove that it is the crisis you are alleging. Short of that it is just more emotional drivel.

And fwiw, I haven't made up my mind yet on this issue. I want proof though one way or the other.

What if we agree to these concessions and The Moak Group helps managment eliminate the retirement age? Pass your 27 second FAA physical and your good to go.

WHY WOULD WE MAKE ANY CONCESSIONS DURING HISTORIC RECORD PROFITS?

Hyperbole.

And there will be some sort of give on this contract. you are incredibly naïve if you don't think so. No, I am not "managing expectations" I am advocating reality. There is something management wants. I have no clue what it is, but those that believe it will be one sided and all win on our side are delusional. Delusional. The job of the negotiators is to get far far more than they are able to give. I expect them to do just that.

We don't have pay banding now. Objectively, pay banding is a concession. You do not need to be very smart to see it cuts required head count.

You are saying it won't. We don't have it now. It is incumbent upon you to prove it is harmless.

Nice try. I am pretty sure I have NOT said that it won't cut head count. My issue is how much it will really affect it. I believe that it will hardly be noticed because of the growth spurt/retirement spurt we find ourselves in. Ball's in your court. If it is minimal and minor then perhaps that is the "concession" that we wind up giving which gets us a hefty hefty pay increase. If not, then it will be something else.

C'mon Scambo. You're a smart guy. Look at the state of the business we currently find ourselves in.

I made up my mind 6 months before you began posting on here. I am a NO vote with respect to pay banding, as well as any cuts to profit sharing. I made that position clear on my contract survey as well. If this is something the company wants you can guarantee that there is a data-driven reason for it. I've flown with the negotiating chair and he mentioned that pay banding may be on the table because the company has a training problem that will just get worse with more new hires and more aircraft acquisitions.

I'm a little fuzzy on what you mean by the state of the business. You make it sound negative.

Personally, I want to feel all of the benefits of the upcoming retirements. Each and every one of them. We have been stagnant for the better part of a decade. If we had massive growth on the wide body fleets, I might agree with you that we would barely feel it. We don't have that, so I feel the squeeze already.

By state of the business, he means that with all of the retirements coming up we shouldn't worry about things that slow progression or reduce head count.

I disagree, we have stagnated for so long, now that things are finally moving in the right direction, I don't want anything to slow movement down one bit. I'm also concerned about age 67 rearing it's ugly head when retirements really kick in a few years from now. But that's just me.