Originally Posted by Viper25 (Post 3748121)

They got bailed out because they were too big to fail. They weren’t bailed out after 9/11 because they were not too big to fail. 4 carriers have 80% of the market share. It never used to be like that.

The other factor is retirements. There has never been a retirement wave like this one. And it will blunt staffing overages for a while to come. There was no such shock absorber in previous crises.

I ask again, how long as it been since the big 3 furloughed?

Originally Posted by NotMrNiceGuy (Post 3748128)

I get your point. Not trying to be antagonistic, but American furloughed during COVID.

Originally Posted by Viper25 (Post 3748121)

They got bailed out because they were too big to fail. They weren’t bailed out after 9/11 because they were not too big to fail. 4 carriers have 80% of the market share. It never used to be like that.

The other factor is retirements. There has never been a retirement wave like this one. And it will blunt staffing overages for a while to come. There was no such shock absorber in previous crises.

I ask again, how long as it been since the big 3 furloughed?

Originally Posted by NotOldNotYoung (Post 3748163)

Being too big to fail does not imply too big to cut. If demand falls off and they become overmanned enough, they can and will furlough just like FedEx could furlough if it makes business sense. I get concerned when I see rapid growth. What goes up usually comes back down to a normal trend just like what we see now post-Covid growth mania.


Furlough doesn’t equal failure to a business…but it sure feels like it to the furloughed employees.

Originally Posted by Viper25 (Post 3748132)

They furloughed. And unfurloughed because of the bailout. And the pilots got back pay.

Delta sent furlough letters and would’ve done the same thing if not for an 11th hour LOA and the government bailout.

The American furlough during COVID wasn’t actually a furlough. It was a threat of furlough that didn’t truly happen, despite a tiny gap between (repaid) unemployment and the bailout. If the bailout by chance happened to be slightly earlier, that gap wouldn’t exist at all and they’d be the same as Delta (not furloughing).


The fact that American’s furlough “failed” is actually what proves my entire point anyway.

Originally Posted by Viper25 (Post 3748121)

They got bailed out because they were too big to fail. They weren’t bailed out after 9/11 because they were not too big to fail. 4 carriers have 80% of the market share. It never used to be like that.

The other factor is retirements. There has never been a retirement wave like this one. And it will blunt staffing overages for a while to come. There was no such shock absorber in previous crises.

I ask again, how long as it been since the big 3 furloughed?

Originally Posted by Merle Haggard (Post 3748127)

Actually, highly leveraged aircraft purchases bring the interests of aircraft finance markets and Boeing to the "too big to fail" table as well - making it even less likely that the government would sit on its hands.

Good point.

Originally Posted by NotMrNiceGuy (Post 3748172)

The industry has changed. I’m with you. But the nasty thing about furlough is personal and familial upheaval. I flew with at least half a dozen American furloughees. Two didn’t want to leave, but at the time felt there was no other choice. One has since moved on to DAL. They would tell you it was a harsh experience to go through.

Originally Posted by NotMrNiceGuy (Post 3746962)

Our Airbus rates have always been tied to Legacy rates. Even before the 777 was on FedEx property. We’re not changing it now just so some folks that benefited from it the past 20 years can also get a pension bump before jumping ship.

Nobody is shooting for industry standard anyway, so it’s all a moot point. Industry leading hourly rates of pay.

When a new wide body (larger than the MD) was to come on property, the intent was to have it pay above the WB rate. Just like the A380 rates. We lost the grievance, but made up for it through BKO.

Originally Posted by DLax85 (Post 3747288)

Keep thinking - you’ll figure those things out.

Is being “not against” the same as being “for”?

Is this “double edge sword” sharp on either side, or dull on both? …like yours always seems to be.

The idea that our pilot group is, or should be, afraid to stand up for ourselves has proven to be untrue - especially among the younger guys.

Unity and fortitude will be required all the way to the end zone.

I post to present data, information & some insight, and to hopefully promote useful discussion & debate. Useful meaning an actual position or solution is ultimately articulated.

Your motivation and goals appear different.

VR,
DLax

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3747494)

I made no judgements on what rates to use. I was simply trying to make the point that it doesn't matter that we can upgrade at 5 years and UPS cannot. Rates are rates and they should be industry standard at the very least regardless of how many pilot would be at the 5 year captain pay rate. We don't choose the fleet nor can control pilot age/retirement demographics which are the driving factors in upgrade time.

But if I was going to make the case, it would be that our previous contracts banded all of our WBs to everyone else's top paying aircraft. That's why our WB pay rate has been about the same as everyone else's 777 even though those other airlines had lower pay rates for their 767s and A300. So why does management get to make the convinient argument that it should be different now? In reality, we've had three pay rates: WB + BKO (777,MD11), WB (767,A300), & NB (757,737). If there was going to be a change (other than maybe a single blended rate ala IPA), it would be to band the 757 to our WB rate just like industry standard, WB rate meaning everyone else's top paying aircraft, just as in the past.



Industry standard also includes profit sharing of 10% pre-tax up to $2.5B and 20% pre-tax above $2.5B, and cash over cash, and 8 holiday pay days, and retro of 4/4/14/first pay raise, and snap up provisions, and training pay of 5 hours a day, and full B fund contributions during LTD, and no cap on LTD, and no offsets on LTD, and 1:3.5 duty rig, and hotels during CQ and sub, and scope that protects extraterritorial flying and belly freight assurances. That doesn't include reserve rules and I can keep going on other items as well. How much far behind do we have to get before you stop using the PBS excuse? The fact we are line bidding is one of about three things we may be ahead on.

Originally Posted by max8222 (Post 3748088)

I use PBS as a quick example and the two of you run off on a tangent like I said I would trade your new born to keep PBS.

My friend is on the LEC at Delta and spent man hours duing their TA talking to pilots in their crew room and on the phone about the contract. So I assumed he was a good source.

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3748232)

Look at pay rate history. In 2000, the big pax carriers had huge contracts that dwarfed ours. UAL, for example, had their 777 captains getting $316 per hour in 2004. DAL's 777 rate was $320. How long did it take for us to get to that level? After all the bankruptcies, we became the lead by default. So no, our WB were not always tied to others 777 rates. Between the bankruptcies and 2016, UPS and us were the leaders. For example, DAL top 777 rate in 2006 was $186 while our MD11 rate, soon to be our 777 rate, was $225.

Now, just to clarify BKO, you do know that BKO isn't limited to the 777 and MD11. We have 767 trips that get BKO. There is nothing in the contract that limits BKO to any specific aircraft.

Which of these legacy airlines currently have B funds? I thought that their full retirement plan was a DC plan. And you might want to check how they determine the amount to contribute to that DC plan. With our A plan, you get funded while in LTD. If you hit your high 5 in the first 7 years of work, and then go out on LTD for 20+ years, you still get the full DB (A plan) benefit. The only reason that these plans were ever refered to as A and B plans is because the DB (A) plan was the primary retirement mechanism and the DC (B) plan was a secondary mechanism meant to make up for mandatory retirement before you could collect SS and medicare benefits. That history seems to have gotten lost.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748367)

Someone should be once the pay rate comparison tables for the 2006 and 2011 TAs and it showed our WB rates more or less in line with everyobody else's top pay rates. And I understand that that was more becuase others went through bk and came down. Which makes my point even stronger. We never went through bk so why shouldn't we keep up with other's top pay rates when they have had to go through bk?

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748367)

Lastly, AA/DA/UA all contribute 17% to their pilots' 401k. Its their equivalent of us getting years of servicee when we are on LTD. And they get 17% while on LTD. And their LTDs have no offsets.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748367)

My point in all this Ive posted on this thread is, lets not argue on behalf of management. They certainly don't need the help. Lets focus on arguments FOR increases and different areas.

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3748453)

Prior to the bankruptcies, UAL and DAL had 777 rates that were $50-$60 per hour more than our top WB rates. After the BK's, we were about $30-$50 per hour higher until 2016, when DAL, UAL, and AA all took the lead again by about $30 per hour. So to say that our WB rates have alway been tied to the highest pax rates simply isn't true.

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3748453)

Prior to the bankruptcies, UAL and DAL had 777 rates that were $50-$60 per hour more than our top WB rates. After the BK's, we were about $30-$50 per hour higher until 2016, when DAL, UAL, and AA all took the lead again by about $30 per hour. So to say that our WB rates have alway been tied to the highest pax rates simply isn't true.

Yes, there are offsets, at least in DAL's contract. It's right there in section 26.

No one is arguing on management's behalf. If you don't think they can come up with these ideas themselves, then you are underestimating our opponent. By discussing their potential stances to our request for industry standard, hopefully we can avoid shooting ourselves in the foot.

Originally Posted by Viper25 (Post 3748132)

They furloughed. And unfurloughed because of the bailout. And the pilots got back pay.

Delta sent furlough letters and would’ve done the same thing if not for an 11th hour LOA and the government bailout.

The American furlough during COVID wasn’t actually a furlough. It was a threat of furlough that didn’t truly happen, despite a tiny gap between (repaid) unemployment and the bailout. If the bailout by chance happened to be slightly earlier, that gap wouldn’t exist at all and they’d be the same as Delta (not furloughing).


The fact that American’s furlough “failed” is actually what proves my entire point anyway.

Originally Posted by plzdontfireme (Post 3748462)

UA removed their offsets I believe.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748509)

The fact that our WB rates were comporable to their bk rates makes my case stronger. FDX never went through bk so if anything our rates should be higher their theirs.

LTD, two of the three legacies have no caps either. Its become industry standard. Let me put it this way, if we got no offsets, we still wouldn't be industry leading. We'd be catching up. So sorry if I didn't mention that delta has offsets for workers comp or pbgc anuities or that they all other offsets are gone after 3 years. The point is that if you throw out pbs, I throw out a couple dozen items were we are not industry STANDARD. The pbs argment is dead.

Lastly, this isn't about trying not to let management know any secrets. This is about OUR mentality. The mentality that we can't have a good things. When people make the pbs argument it furthers that mentaility into other's minds and they start spreading it. We need unity, not pilots thinking we cant ask for more simple becuase we don't have pbs or some other item. If you don't beleive it, fine. Don't spread the mind virus to others that are fighting to get a better contract.

Originally Posted by plzdontfireme (Post 3748580)

Outside of bankruptcy. I can't think of a single time the legacy carriers looked at our negotiated widebody rates and said "oh hey, let's negotiate a rate lower than FedEx, that will surely pass and won't drag the industry down with us"

meanwhile, 2000 fedex pilots voted to do exactly that.

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3748628)

Nope, UAL still has an offset.

Originally Posted by plzdontfireme (Post 3748580)

Outside of bankruptcy. I can't think of a single time the legacy carriers looked at our negotiated widebody rates and said "oh hey, let's negotiate a rate lower than FedEx, that will surely pass and won't drag the industry down with us"

meanwhile, 2000 fedex pilots voted to do exactly that.

Originally Posted by 2BEER (Post 3748643)

This exactly!

Originally Posted by plzdontfireme (Post 3748648)

Their AIP guide said that offsets were removed unless you accept another position at UAL. Is that not correct?

Originally Posted by EMBFlyer (Post 3748623)

The American furlough was ABSOLUTELY a furlough. I was there. They sent pilots to the street. It was real and it hppened.

Originally Posted by TransWorld (Post 3749008)

Not to minimize it. But how long were you Furloughed?

Originally Posted by EMBFlyer (Post 3749012)

I personally wasn't. I left AA on my own accord, but I was I done with the place.

I know the actual furlough was very short, but it was technically a furlough, none the less. That was painfully evident when it came time to train the recalled pilots back up and the length of time it took to requal them.

Whether I was personally furloughed or not is irrelevant. I was just correcting a small amount of the piles and piles misinformation that plagues this site (and others).

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3748632)

You were the one who said that our WB rates were banded to the majors highest rate. I showed that wasn't the case.

Which two, UAL has an offset as well.

Where did I say anything about PBS? You are confusing me with another poster.

This discussion is about 757 rates. I simply pointed out that saying our 757 rates should be tied to UAL, DAL, or AA because they are industry standard is a dangerous argument. For 17 years, our 757 has been tied to our NB rate. When we got the 777, the arbitrator agreed with the company that we have a NB and WB rate. Now, if we say we want industry standard rates, how do we keep our 767 and Airbus at WB rates. They aren't industry standard. They also comprise about 35% of our crewforce.

I have no problem trying to make things better. We just better make sure our arguments for one item don't hurt another item.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3749222)

Our WB rates were comporable to other's top pay aircraft. That's what I said only becuase I saw the pay rate comparison tables from contract TAs from the 2000s.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748367)

Someone should be once the pay rate comparison tables for the 2006 and 2011 TAs and it showed our WB rates more or less in line with everyobody else's top pay rates.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3749222)

Yes, UAL has offsets. I wasn't including pbgc offsets (that only affect those who have a pension and are on ltd) and offsets that expire after 3 years. And they did get rid of the other offsets. Nonetheless, that is still more closer to standard than ours. So it doesn't hurt the case I was making.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748367)

And they get 17% while on LTD. And their LTDs have no offsets.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3748509)

LTD, two of the three legacies have no caps either. Its become industry standard.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3749222)

Ok, the 757. I agree with you there...up to the point that the UAL TA was ratified. Now industry standard is that the 757 is pay banded with the 767-300. This is not a disengenous argument unless you think you can make the arugment that since the 757 paid $120/hour (or whatever it was) 17 years ago that we cannot say it needs to be hiegh now along with other's contractual gains on the 757.

Peronally, I'd like to see a single blended rate with credit for training savings.

Originally Posted by JustInFacts (Post 3749409)

I have posted the rates from the legacies contracts and from ours. You said....



I posted the 2006 rate as "For example, DAL top 777 rate in 2006 was $186 while our MD11 rate, soon to be our 777 rate, was $225." And in 2012, part of the 2011 contract and after DAL signed a new contract, I posted "DALPA signed a contract with their top WB for 2012 at $235 per hour. Our rate in March of 2012 was $261 per hour."

So, are you saying that rates that were between $26 to $39 per hour lower are comparable?



Well, first you said...



Then you said...



I have shown that both of those statements are not correct. So yes, it does hurt your argument. Do you even know what the offsets are for DAL, UAL, and us? You got the UAL one wrong in this post. What is the offset and LTD at Fedex?




Not really sure what you are trying to get at here. The 757 being banded with the 767-300 has been industry standard for a long time, so I don't know what the UAL TA has to do with anything. That wasn't something that just happened in 2023.

Originally Posted by Maddog64 (Post 3749667)

Our contract is worth more per pilot than Deltas, We just put too much of the value in the retirement a plan.

Originally Posted by Moosefire (Post 3749761)

Go take a look at the W2 thread... while I acknolwlege there may be some outliers there.

I do know this all my best friends are at the big 3, at the same longevity (6-7 years), and they're all out earning me. Unscientific, but we compare notes and I know I'm far behind.

Originally Posted by Maddog64 (Post 3749801)

And the cost to increase the pension was huge. That doesn't show up in your W2.

Originally Posted by Nightflyer (Post 3749812)

What about the savings to the company from sunsetting the A plan?

No one seems to want to talk about that.