|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1020681)
If you listen to sailing, slow, alfa, and PG, then FDX is not one of our peers. :mad:
I got calls from DL, WN, and FDX (neither of which are our peers??) within 3 weeks of each other, all to do the same top notch job. I expect to be paid as such. And some people wonder why I'm pretty sure our entrenched core is beyond recovery... |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1020685)
What happened? You haven't been doing a top notch job since you've been here?:p
FDX is in a different, rational industry, one that only has two real domestic competitors in the whole market. Even though fNWA had a freight division they never included the overnight express carriers in their contract comparison. I am told they will be in ours. WN is in the same industry with a different business model. They will be included in the comparison. Note that the companies that you mentioned are 2 of the 3 more highly paid pilot groups than Delta (UPS is the third). Is there anything else common in those groups other than higher pilot pay?;) The fact that we do the exact same job as them for a top tier carrier? I think that should suffice. Thank you for proving my point. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1020689)
The fact that we do the exact same job as them for a top tier carrier? I think that should suffice. Thank you for proving my point. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1020687)
If the last statement is the general feeling of the pilot group as a whole, there are mechanisms in place to change them.
|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1020685)
Is there anything else common in those groups other than higher pilot pay?;)
|
Originally Posted by formerdal
(Post 1020692)
You mean other than flying the exact same airplanes with albeit more precious cargo!!
|
The straw man arguement that FedEx and UPS are so different as to warrant exclusion from our compeitive peer group is completely self refuting. If all the money flying airplanes is truly into cargo as the arguement for competitive peer excusion is made, then why are those very same managers making that arguement the same ones saying there is no money in cargo? And then tripping all over themselves to sign massive postal contracts as fast as they can precicely because of how lucritive it is?
We have difficulty with payloads and performance on several long haul routes due to the tons of cargo we load, and some of those routes have nothing to do with short runways or high terrain (like ATH when we were carrying so much yogurt and/or marble we were load limited). So if all the money is in cargo and we therefore can't throw those rates in for comparison, then why are we not going into cargo? If there's no money in cargo, how can they afford those rates? Bottom line, they fly the same equipment in the same airspace and hire from the same talent pool of pilots as we do, and they are global powerhouses like we are. So it is pure fantasy to think they are somehow so seperate that they are irrelevant. And absolutely ROFL @ anyone who claims SWA isn't not only a competitive peer but also an absolute floor for compensation as they are 100% relevant. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1020696)
Nope, the market thinks their cargo is more valuable. I don't, but that's what the revenue numbers show.;)
Its a joke to call air travel "deregulated". |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1020690)
Hey, that's one. Can you think of any others?;)
Why aren't you making these arguments as well? That is the biggest concern. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1020698)
The straw man arguement that FedEx and UPS are so different as to warrant exclusion from our compeitive peer group is completely self refuting. If all the money flying airplanes is truly into cargo as the arguement for competitive peer excusion is made, then why are those very same managers making that arguement the same ones saying there is no money in cargo? And then tripping all over themselves to sign massive postal contracts as fast as they can precicely because of how lucritive it is?
We have difficulty with payloads and performance on several long haul routes due to the tons of cargo we load, and some of those routes have nothing to do with short runways or high terrain (like ATH when we were carrying so much yogurt and/or marble we were load limited). So if all the money is in cargo and we therefore can't throw those rates in for comparison, then why are we not going into cargo? If there's no money in cargo, how can they afford those rates? Bottom line, they fly the same equipment in the same airspace and hire from the same talent pool of pilots as we do, and they are global powerhouses like we are. So it is pure fantasy to think they are somehow so seperate that they are irrelevant. And absolutely ROFL @ anyone who claims SWA isn't not only a competitive peer but also an absolute floor for compensation as they are 100% relevant. BTW, the money isn't in cargo, it's in overnight express packages. At least according to FedEx and UPS. DHL found out it wasn't, and so is the USPS. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:42 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands