Originally Posted by JamesBond

Lots of dead issues on these forums. Doesn't mean they aren't worth discussing. You are right about the initial training, but once the dust settles it would be easy.

Originally Posted by gloopy

There is no room for that dust for the next 10-15 years. They're absolutely slammed now with very low mandatory retirements. Imagine when a couple hundred per year goes to near 1000 per year soon...with at least two additional fleet types! LOL!!!!!

The only way the company would ever agree to LBP now would be in exchange for massive freezes and other non starters.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

I think that depends on how one defines QOL. If it means vacation/days off/ability to choose what trips you fly, then I disagree big time. You might find yourself more senior on different equipment which would result in exactly the opposite of what you contest. The one downside that I would see is that every category/seat would become much more senior at the top of each for those reasons above as guys found their equilibrium and camped out. On the other hand, if QOL is solely equipment based, you would be right but I contend that many guys will bail from certain categories because they ONLY do it for the money. I know many people that do not like all international flying for example.

And, of course I disagree with you. If you have more people coming in above you on a seniority list merge because of a LBP system, it certainly affects your QOL items. You admitted it in the statement I quoted. I'll give you an example. I'm at the bottom in my category and I like it but I would also like to move up. If we merge based on DOH (which is what a LBP system would do) what happens when that 737 guy that had no expectations of anything but a 737, due to the merge is now senior to me, bids my category and slots in above me. That certainly does affect my QOL.

I agree with your last statement. The funny thing is that QOL is the one thing that is sacrificed in chasing that pay. Everything else we do is determined by seniority. (The only thing that I can think of that is not is jumpseating). The thing is here that we are discussing pay. I guess what I don't like about the way it is now is that we depend on management to buy a lot of the big iron in order for as many of us to make as much as possible. It's like making Admiral in the Navy, there are only so many open slots. There just has to be a better way.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

Since we are using Alaska as the case study: how many guys that drive to work (in SEATTLE) would commute across country to fly a 777 for the same money? If they did, how many Seattle residents would then benefit?

I wonder where the FUPM mantra went?

Originally Posted by newKnow

I don't know. But, how many would stay right there and fly the A330?

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

I don't want to bid any other category in my base. Doing what you propose, I would almost be forced to do it. You cannot talk about going to this type of pay system without talking about how it affects seniority.

Denny