![]() |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1144388)
I'll give you the bullet points.
-Biggest pays most under current system. Fine. That would be great if we had 50 of each of them.. we don't. we have 16 and 18. -Management chooses which airplanes we fly, we negotiate how much we will be paid to fly whatever they buy. -All we have done, and all we are going to be doing for the foreseeable future is buying smaller gauge airframes than those CURRENTLY on the property. -net result is less pay for the entire pilot group over the course of a career. -the net result of THAT is that we have less $ in our retirement and investment plans, because the DB plan no longer exists and we have to fund our own retirement... -That seems like we are continuing to shoot the group as a whole in the foot just to keep guys like Carl paid the most... -The net result is less pay AND as a bonus, a crappier QOL over the course of a career to keep this same system because if you want to maximize your retirement, you have to either a)fly more, or b) bid an airplane where you have no seniority.. Hobson's choice. they both suck, and it is so unnecessary. While you're entitled to your opinion, your bolded statement above is simply not factual. Carl |
Sorry for thread drift gents but I need to check loads again for tomorrow, if it's tight I'll have to buy a ticket instead of jumpseating.
It's for Saturday march 3, ATL-MBJ, 8:30am and 9:49am flights, can you also list if any non revs are listed? Thanks much! |
Originally Posted by Columbia
(Post 1144401)
Golf clap..........what if they give up all 777s and 747s and add moooore NBs? Can't happen?
Originally Posted by Columbia
(Post 1144401)
What if the total seniority list is 8,000 in 10 years?
Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1144435)
Not necessarily. It's just the way ALPA contracts have been written since prior to the jet age.
The theory goes back to the introduction of jets. Jets not only vastly increased capacity, but vastly increased speed. Both were huge increases in productivity per hour of piloting. ALPA fought hard for pay increases based on this productivity. Management fought it extremely hard. Management wanted pilots to be paid the same.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1144435)
It was what ALPA fought hard for. It had nothing to do with ol Carl. Unions get insulted constantly for being afraid of more productivity. It's a slur. ALPA fought hard back in the day, and won the right to be paid via productivity. To me, it has always made economic sense to pay per productivity. For me personally, I would prefer to fly day trips on the 757. That would be my idea of the ideal gig. I don't do that because it's not the best financial decision for me. If we move away from pay based on productivity, we play into the hands of those who wish to taint us with the brush of being afraid to be productive.
It has NOTHING to do with my job being any harder than anyone elses.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1144435)
It could be argued that way, and could be argued another way. Truth is, both jobs have significant risks and skill requirements. That's a given. The only question is whether you pay pilots based on the amount of revenue they produce based on the aircraft they fly.
I can only give you my opinions and the historical background of how we got here. Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1144437)
What I've bolded above is the falsehood upon which you've based your argument on pay banding. Truth is, none of us knows this to be true. In fact (as acl65pilot posted earlier), the new 747-8i could likely provide irresistible levels of CASM to Delta.
While you're entitled to your opinion, your bolded statement above is simply not factual. Carl |
Originally Posted by TenYearsGone
(Post 1144428)
Come on Carl:eek:. I almost PUKED. That is one "RATHER" style photo. I, second, Jesse or Super to inject some medicine to offset this NASTY picture. PUKE
TEN Sorry. Mea Culpa. http://justpictures2.files.wordpress...ailyceleb3.jpg Carl |
Hey, has anyone received his profit sharing check yet?
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1144432)
No.. we really don't have pay banding.
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1144432)
Not in any appreciable amount anyway.
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1144432)
Yeah I guess you could make the argument that because the 757-767 pays the same that the biggest fleet is "banded" but that doesn't really hold water.
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1144432)
Other than that, we have 34 airplanes banded.. :rolleyes:
Carl |
Originally Posted by FrankCobretti
(Post 1144448)
Hey, has anyone received his profit sharing check yet?
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1144447)
I like them a little thicker. Do you have any with curves. This one is too skinny for my taste:D TEN |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:11 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands