The logic remains - if the CRJ pilot group costs more, then we are compensated more. For the most part, your benefits are superior so we can rule that out. Trying to figure out who has better 'soft time' benefits I think would require several CPAs. I am guessing that it's a wash but if 'soft time' doesn't make the CRJ cost more, then that only leaves seniority.

 

On the hourly rate in years 17-18 for -200 CA's, sure. But do some simple math. Total up the number of CRJ pilots, THEN total up the number of ERJ pilots. Just use the pay rates, nevermind all the soft time/benefits in the ERJ CBA and that "logic" you're trying use isn't really as simple or valid now, is it?

Or to dumb it down, count how many pilot paychecks go to CRJ pilots, then total up the amount sent to ERJ pilots. And for some reason, the ERJ side is more "cost competitive".

 

The argument you're making is circular. If the ERJ side is more cost competitive per block hour solely based on pilot expenses then the CRJ pilots on average have to be compensated more per block hour.

 

Who said I was basing it purely on who's compensated more per hour? I ALREADY agreed that -200 pilots on 17-18 year rate get more, as well the -700/-900 pilots. That's a given.

Your argument is all too simple and flawed. There's more, way more to cost than the hourly rate. Whether it be what the pilot sees on the paycheck, or how the company equates cost to block hour per pilot.

Operation Green light was inefficient, the way ATL runs things is even worse. It'd be intesting to see the bean counter breakdown. Again, your logic isn't taking into account ALL factors.

 

The original statement that Leroy was responding to was that L-XJT is less expensive. This whole discussion centers around PBS which is a pilot expense. We have the same management structure, how can L-XJT be less expensive unless the pilot group costs less? Is the claim truly that administering PBS costs the company that much more?

From earlier posts when I stated cost per block hour, I included in my thinking hourly rate, soft credit, health benefits, vacation, etc. What pilot cost factor do you believe that I am missing that would allow L-XJT as a pilot group to cost less and still be compensated more? I will again assert that the major difference is pilot seniority but I am more than willing to be shown the way.

 

It's very simple: we are more efficient. Our aircraft and crews are better utilized, training and scheduling is more efficient regardless of what the PBS gurus will make you think. Our crews cost less to operate per block hour but our compensation is much higher through our work rules. Efficiency is what makes up the difference. We do much more flying on average per day per crew member.

 

Considering our aircraft and crews are under the same management now, claiming that L-XJT is better utilized is an interesting statement.

Speaking of efficiency - CRJ-200 flying for Delta is constrained to 750 NM. Very inefficient and nothing to do with our work rules. L-ASA allows 7 or 8 leg days which allows higher crew utilization. L-ASA min day credit and duty rigs prevent the company from forcing us to sit for long periods without additional compensation (not efficient but allows better pay). All pilot pairings are now created using L-XJT's pairings generator. The system of bidding has little to do with how efficiently the crews and aircraft are utilized. Vacation low and conflicting trip drops both reduce crew utilization.

Where are the numbers you base your opinion on coming from? You will find it's much easier to convince someone with concrete evidence.

 

Bahahahahahahahah. And you does your wife tell you that objects are larger than they appear too?