From the sounds of it around here, SWA pay for ours 737, adjusted up/down for size of aircraft, SWA min pay per day, same average days off and reserve guarantee, and scope would be just fine for a contract. Add a 3%-5% per year raise. Sure - that's a pretty good minimum for me.

And as DAL88 pointed out, I don't think DALPA is thinking of that as a minimum. Personally, I think their view of the minimum is 3% raise each year with some fixes to 23K and maybe a few other tiems. They *aren't* going to change much in scheduling - they just did that with the SOT. The only items I bet we'll see are the 5-6 items they couldn't come to a consensus on in the SOT.

Ask the DALPA guys why the Airtran guys can get Southwest wages, but we can't? Maybe they deserve it, and we don't? We'll see I guess in the opener.

Which DALPA guy said that...or is it some "duff" pontificating from BL?:rolleyes:

Hypothetical situation . . . you're riding in the back of an MD88. The flight is late, and the cabin is stifling hot. The captain makes the welcome PA in the cabin stating he's flown fighters for [number greater than 20] years and thus likes to spend a lot of time upside down in airplanes, and on this flight plans on doing a roll after takeoff . . . do you laugh?

:o

I guess that depends on how you frame the debate. By floor I mean what is reasonably allowed to even enter the conversation. We won't ask for a billion dollars an hour, and the company negotiators won't ask to pay us 2 cans of cat food and a free USAToday per month. By floor I mean credibility. There is zero credibility in saying negotations start from either end at less than SWA. SWA pay, rigs, per diem, reserve days off (and yes even scope, although we would likely have to allow a "reasonable" phase out/sunset period for some contracts) is like admitting gravity exists or that we will conduct negotiations in English instead of Klingon (some people actually learn to speak that BTW).

An opener, however ambitious, has to be able to stand the test of reasonability to some degree, even (and especially to) a neutral. Saying things SWA has can't be afforded at a global powerhouse that does what SWA does plus massive international, first class and worldwide network revenue they don't even have is laughable. Objection your honor, irrelevant.

That's how we frame the debate about what a floor is. Not what's "our" floor, but what floor is even reasonable allowed to be present in the conversation if the process is to have any integrity in the first place.

Now, that said, how ludachris [sic] will it be if our opener is in any way less than a very large domestic competitor that doesn't even have all our big money sources of revenue? Inexcusable, that's about how much.

fwiw, the reason I harp on the MD88 being 1:1 pay with SWA is because why pay our largest and highest paying narrowbody the same pay that SWA pays for an aircraft that is the smallest narrowbody in our fleet and only used domestically.

Background:

1. SWA will, when counting firm orders including the AirTran fleet and firm orders, have an average seating capacity of 135 for their monstrous 896 no-RJ fleet.

2. Delta average seating for its 737 fleet is 156, with 73 being 738s and 10 being 737s. The DAL 737 is therefore 21 seats larger than the SWA fleet on average and has a tremendously more complicated international mission focus.

3. The Delta average seating for the A319/320 is 138, with 55 A319s and 69 A320s in airline non charter service. The average seating capacity is near identical to the SWA capacity.

4. Delta average seating for the MD88/MD90 fleet is 153, with 117 MD88s that will soon all seat 149 and 59 MD90s seating 160. The average seating capacity is 18 seats greater for the MD89 than SWA fleet.

5. Only 2% of the new SWA fleet will be 175 seat 738s whereas our 737 fleet is 88% 738s.

6. Top end pay for SWA's fleet this year (and assuming the 717 will be paid equally) is $210 and $147 for CA and FO. Our 737 is $174 and $119, the A320 $168 and $115, MD90 $165 and $113, MD88 $161 and $110 and DC9 $157 and $107. Thus the lowest paying is the DC9 followed by the MD88. Highest paying NB is the 737.

7. The pay increase to achieve parity between their fleet and ours is 21 to 24% for the 737 for left and right seat, 30 to 34% for the MD88, 25 to 28% for the A320 and 27 to 30% for the MD90. So NB fleet wide is a 21 to 37% increase for parity. And that does not take into account the min guarantee difference of 78 to 70 hours for SWA and DAL. NOR DOES IT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT W2 PARITY WHICH REQUIRES A PROBABLY 50% PAY INCREASE.

8. 10% of the SWA fleet will be 117 seat Boeing 717s, a DC-9-30 in size. Those SWA pilots will be flying $53 and $40 per hour more than our pilots flying on DC-9-30 pay rates.

As I see it, the DAL 737 fleet flies a near 20 seat on average larger aircraft on more difficult missions. I don't think the DAL 737 pay should equal SWA 737 pay just because they're both 737s and I don't think it matters if SWA takes deliveries of a few 738s. A RC-12 in the Army while still a Beech King Air 200 is in no way doing the same mission as the average domestic King Air.

The A320 and 319 share a very similar domestic mission profile to the SWA 737 and very similar seating average. That is a far more reasonable pay parity. But the A320/319 is smaller than the MD88 and MD90 by 14 seats on average and the A319 is 27% smaller than the MD90, but yet those categories pay less. I say you can't use the A320 for parity if the 88/90 still pay less.

I think pick the lowest common aircraft, the DC-9-30 and make them equal. If SWA is willing to pay a DC9-30 pilot a higher rate (higher than our 747 pay) then use that airplane. If not the 9, then move up one aircraft on the pecking order and equal out the pay and that's the MD88.

Then adjust the higher paying A320, 737, 767, 7ER, 765, 777, 744 and 330 fleets proportionate to the pay differences now and call it a day.

I have flown with that guy. Good guy. PA skills...not so much. The free beer for 4 days spot on! : )

what he said ^^^

Hey Slow,

Why do you find it necessary to insult everyone with an opinion different than yours ? I feel it is demeaning to you and erases the points you would like to make.

If you have a cogent, accurate comment, it will stand on it's own merit without the venom......try it sometime.

Regards,
BG