Search
Notices

The List of 5

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-28-2005, 03:27 PM
  #31  
Realistic
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If 85 hours is the ideal upon which our pay is based then $125.00 per hour (3rd year 320 Captain) straight pay would go a long way toward helping those who are short-changed month to month and to those who WILL be short-changed in the future. Presumably it would have no effect on the income statement.
What we will hear from those who covet the 100 credit hour months is that the company can't afford to make this change and that productivity will be badly damaged and "we're different" than everybody else but what they really mean is "get your own deal!"
There IS a number that would be cost neutral to the company.
A cash pay out for profit sharing would help those of us who find ourselves stuck in a legacy life with new order compensation.
SouthWest pilots are paid straight pay and profit sharing in cash. Both of these changes would cost us almost nothing.
Dismantling the scheduling committee would cost nothing either. I sincerely believe that we can get a more "caring" solution from representatives of the company. We would definately get more "integrity" from Kew.
Three HUGE changes for the little guy that will be ignored because YES there are pilots involved in every detail of this company and they will make sure that nothing like this ever happens.
Enjoy life at the bottom boys and girls.
 
Old 06-28-2005, 05:16 PM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 157
Default

Meworry,
A lot of what you say also makes sense. However, a couple of things. You talk about margins and responsiblities to the share holders. Well, most of us are share holders and what about us? Since JetBlue does not pay dividends there is no direct compenstion to the share holders except the value of the stock. Which by the way is gone no where but down.

added later
You mention alot about margins, and talk about quarterly margins, the annual is forecast between 6-9% if I remembers, that means if we got a 2.5 % cost of living raise it would drop just 1%. What about the $1 per ticket to pay the employee? If management can predict operations and mx cost in the future and plan for it, why can't they plan on a 2.5-3% cost of living raise every year? Again, we are their buffer to allow them to keep going, and we don't even get a vote! At least COMAIR got to vote to get either get a pay raise or new airplanes! We get the E190 with not vote! What happened to the slow controlled growth that we were going to do with 15-18 A320s per year?

Now, if management doesn't fix the pay and benefits issue soon, there will be a new dog in town called a union, and that will definitely not be good for the profit margin. Yes, we may lose something as everything is on the table, but it will most likely be more expensive for the company than if they had just given us a cost of living raise.

Finally, the annual raise we get are not cost of living raise. They are longevity raises. They are what separate JR pilots from SR pilots. A normal contract will have both. We are stuck with only one and left to mangement to "take care us"

We are in a downward sprial, that only management can fix. And they better do it soon.

Just my opinion...

FNG


Last edited by FNG320; 06-28-2005 at 07:39 PM.
FNG320 is offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 06:21 PM
  #33  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: 320, Left Seat
Posts: 55
Default


The sky is falling. The sky is falling.
Blue 2 is offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 06:43 PM
  #34  
Realistic
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Great one liners - no substance despite your confindence.
I would be happy to debate you in public at the council meetings to come.
 
Old 06-28-2005, 07:10 PM
  #35  
Double Digit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Originally Posted by FNG320
Meworry,
A lot of what you say also makes sense. However, a couple of things. You talk about margins and responsiblities to the share holders. Well, most of us are share holders and what about us? Since JetBlue does not pay dividends there is no direct compenstion to the share holders except the value of the stock. Which by the way is gone no where but down.

Now, if management doesn't fix the pay and benefits issue soon, there will be a new dog in town called a union, and that will definitely not be good for the profit margin. Yes, we may lose something as everything is on the table, but it will most likely be more expensive for the company than if they had just given us a cost of living raise.

Finally, the annual raise we get are not cost of living raise. They are longevity raises. They are what separate JR pilots from SR pilots. A normal contract will have both. We are stuck with only one and left to mangement to "take care us"

We are in a downward sprial, that only management can fix. And they better do it soon.

Just my opinion...

FNG

Bushy.....No
Union........Yes
Fill out that survey!!!!!
 
Old 06-28-2005, 07:30 PM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 157
Unhappy

Originally Posted by Double Digit
Bushy.....No
Union........Yes
Fill out that survey!!!!!

Bushy, Not happy with, and that is a whole new thread.....

Union, I don't want, but will vote for if management won't fix things soon, it may be the only way.....

Fill out the survey, Done. Gave them both barrels and a lot of bad marks! But I am am afraid they will ignore it again, just like the last couple of years.....

Will just have to wait and see.......

Just my opinion...

FNG
FNG320 is offline  
Old 06-28-2005, 07:34 PM
  #37  
Realistic
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here's a substantive idea....
Since we've recruited very bright mathmatician pilot volunteers to compile statistical analysis about our pairings and for AMP data....why not ask for one more simple task.
Take the last three years of pay data - pilot by pilot, year by year - deidentify all of the data - then classify all of the pay based upon actual block flown PLUS credit earned from all "other" non-block activities and complile the data on spreadsheet number 1.
Then - take all of the same data - and compile it as if each pilot earned straight pay based upon $125 an hour exptrapolated up and down the pay scale and separate out the extraneous pay events such as deadheading checkairmen, transcon line checks, 20 different chief pilots, sweet training deals and the like.
We could then compare the senarios and determine which would really be in keeping with a low cost carrier....
....since we're so sincere about cost and all.
 
Old 06-28-2005, 08:41 PM
  #38  
Meworry?
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Originally Posted by FNG320
Meworry,

Finally, the annual raise we get are not cost of living raise. They are longevity raises. They are what separate JR pilots from SR pilots. A normal contract will have both. We are stuck with only one and left to mangement to "take care us"

Just my opinion...

FNG

Of course you are right about longevity pay. I was just trying to characterize it as inadequate. 2.2% per year is insufficient for captains, and when we do get a raise, I'd like to see seniority pay steepen. I also agree with Realistic on "normalizing" base and premium pay. That's in my survey.

Who knows, maybe we can get a union, I can run for president and make $200K/year that way! I'll nominate you for VP.
 
Old 06-29-2005, 05:46 AM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 157
Default

Originally Posted by Meworry?
Of course you are right about longevity pay. I was just trying to characterize it as inadequate. 2.2% per year is insufficient for captains, and when we do get a raise, I'd like to see seniority pay steepen. I also agree with Realistic on "normalizing" base and premium pay. That's in my survey.

Who knows, maybe we can get a union, I can run for president and make $200K/year that way! I'll nominate you for VP.

Meworry,
I totally agree on the with you, the longevity pay raises are a joke. In the pocket session last summer immediately after the new contract I listened to several of our captains not understand this fact in asking pay questions to DB and VS.

yr1 2.7%
yr2 2.6%
yr3 2.5%
yr4 2.5%
Yr5 1.6%
Yr6 2.3%

and worse.

The Flight attendants get on the average of 5% per year for longevity pay raises. One year it is even 10%. That is why a 12yr FA gets more that a first year 190 FO!

Hey, beinging president may not be bad! We would get a great retirement (defined benefit plan, lifetime medical care (free), Secrect Service protection, a office budget over $100,000 per year). Hey, we could then each do like the Clintons. Buy this mulit-million dollar house in NY and then rent the small support house on the property to the Secret Service for the same price as the mortgage of both houses! Thus a free place to live with the USA paying the mortgage and buillding equity for each of us.

Good luck to us all....

Just my opinion.....

FNG
FNG320 is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 05:50 AM
  #40  
BlueSide
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Of course you are right about longevity pay. I was just trying to characterize it as inadequate. 2.2% per year is insufficient for captains, and when we do get a raise, I'd like to see seniority pay steepen. I also agree with Realistic on "normalizing" base and premium pay. That's in my survey.

Your problem is.... you think in terms of you instead of us. Your a captain so the pay is insufficient only for the captains. You would like to see the seniority pay steepen. What about the 190 fo's that will be starting with us this summer. Some of you "Senior Captains" will make more money this summer than they will earn this year.

Pretty soon there will be more of us (Junior vs. senior) on the line and your thoughts won't matter very much.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
schone
Union Talk
109
06-23-2010 03:55 PM
DON*T HATE ERAU
Regional
16
08-13-2006 11:12 AM
Sir James
Major
13
05-24-2006 06:16 AM
Diesel 10
Cargo
4
03-12-2006 07:33 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices