Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2192529)

Originally Posted by tacamoflyer (Post 2192424)

Whack,
I support retro for any tranny that was here on an amendable contract. From what I understand, they had a contract over on the other side of the partition and it was not amendable. Why would they get retro?
This isn't a troll, I am not looking to pick a fight, I just seriously want to understand your reasoning.
Again, we haven't seen the final details, so it may be that they are getting retro. If so, good for them. I am not against anyone getting more money, I just don't see any reason for it.
Also, the ship has sailed on 2012. Old SWAPA effed that away with yet anther side letter. Let that be a lesson to all of us and move on.

Originally Posted by PCL_128 (Post 2192604)

Yeah, because the B scale wasn't enough, right? Screw them over yet again.

Unbelievable.

Originally Posted by e6bpilot (Post 2192615)

Explain...I seriously don't know what this is referring to or why you are incredulous about it.
Who is getting screwed and why?

Originally Posted by TED74 (Post 2191347)

Then you have accepted the notion that equipment should be as predominant a factor in earnings as it has become. And as 737s replace 757s and CS100s replace MD88s, you'll similarly accept a regression in earnings for Delta pilots.

I think what we all care about is time given to one's employer, and what one receives in exchange. I don't mind comparing very similar forests (e.g., annual W2 or annual TAFB) comprised of very different trees (hourly rates, trip rigs, reserve days/month) - it's the big picture that matters in the long run. Unfortunately, we often debate the trees and completely miss deforrestation right in front of our eyes.

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 2191420)

I don't think anyone is advocating that in the slightest. There's zero chance any TA will contain disproportionately low 777 rates or anything like that. I think all he's saying is that we collectively can't be blinded by top scale rates since we lag the industry (by a WIDE margin) in the number of pilot positions that will actually pay those rates. The Whale will be gone by the end of C2015 (maybe before we even get C2015) so that'll leave the vast majority of the pilots here flying something smaller for most if not all of their careers, and many who do fly it will only get to touch it for a fraction the time as UA/AA. That's all. No one's throwing anyone under the bus.

Originally Posted by Cogf16 (Post 2192883)

Be careful what you wish for if you want to decouple pay from weight/speed/productivity/new technology. And while many younger guys accuse the old heads of "pulling up the ladder" this issue is something that COULD greatly affect the younger crowd. What happens if a supersonic or faster aircraft comes along or an efficient very large jet comes along? Still want a 717 pilot to be paid the same as the pilot on one of these new jets?

Originally Posted by FLY6584 (Post 2191562)

I wouldn't necessarily say we are home more. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on how you look at it, the ability to pickup outside of domicile and the fact we are one fleet type makes picking up open time very easy regardless of whether you live in base so that can be like crack. The fat paychecks on the 20th can be addictive meanwhile your wife leaves you for the lawn guy and takes half your $hit.

In June I credited 137 trips and worked 18 days, but thankfully only spent 8 nights in a hotel because I am able to pickup a lot of one day trips out my home airport which is not a domicile.

In July I credited 104 trips and worked 11 days with 6 nights in a hotel. I also know a Captain who credited 355 trips in July and made $67k doing it, but the guy literally worked the entire month with his 30 off in 7 where it was required.

I do like that we have the flexibility to fly a lot and make more regardless of seniority or whether you live in base or not, but just realize the majority of our guys do fly more than 12 days a month. I think this is why Southwest guys have traditionally had much higher W2's in the past.

Originally Posted by Cogf16 (Post 2192886)

So are you advocating that the NB airplanes receive a higher % increase? Can't really affect the "vast majority" without either accepting an identical % raise across the board (which wouldn't help them)or a disproportionate increase for NB positions and a smaller one for the big jets. Don't really see any other way. And I don't support unequal pay increases.

Originally Posted by Flytolive (Post 2191586)

United has 68 wide bodies on order: 35 350s, 14 773s, 19 787s with plans to park the remaining 22 744s by the end of 2018.
I show DAL with 68 wide bodies on order: 25 359s, 25 339s, and 18 788s.

Why would you include 757s in a wide body tally?