So an easier commute/better trip selection is worth a 7% pay cut every year?

Speaking of which I sure hope both of you have filled out the NC survey!

Did it the day it came out!

I said that I’d accept a 2% raise in 2022 and six months of furlough protection in exchange for Skywest getting to fly our 190s.

Because apparently that’s how we negotiate for raises these days. Scope giveaways.

Well perhaps because of that paltry and embarrassing offer and the subsequent rejection by the pilot group they realize it behooves them to actually survey the group instead of just guessing, and guessing wrong. Fill out the survey people or we risk a similar boneheaded screwup!

short answer….. no.

IMHO, you are minimizing the downside risk.

1) how would reserves work? The $100+ dollar Uber from Kew is a killer. This has been a complete dumpster fire for the FA’s.

2) a 7% pay raise isn’t sustainable. Even if you tie the raise to government figures, we are at about 5% inflation y/y. The big gains will be with the initial contract pay rates.

3) keeping it as a separate base allows more vacation weeks (read: more senior vacation weeks).

4) keeping EWR as a separate base will do wonders for seniority (more senior folks at each base getting more days off, better trips etc.). This seniority bump is likely a 5-10% pay bump (plus QOL bump) however, the size of the bump is directly related to your relative seniority.

not saying your ideas are wrong, but it seems silly to give up a large pay bump, a large seniority bump for a proposed 7% raise. I agree the 2% annual raise is unacceptable in this high inflation environment. I would look for a separate EWR base and a 5% annual raise or an annual raise that mirrors government inflation figures.