A320
 

This table uses a blended rate at 85 hours.

A-320 Capt.
Year 12 $139 to $151
11 $136 to $148
10 $133 to $145
9 $131 to $143
8 $128 to $139
7 $126 to $137
6 $123 to $134
5 $121 to $132
4 $118 to $128
3 $116 to $126
2 $113 to $123
1 $110 to $120

If you blend the rates at 85 hours it raises the base pay rate roughly $10-$12 per hour. For 85-120 credit hour lines 1.5 can still be used.

So, what is the feedback on this suggested pay scale? Does it drive up our CASM to far? Does it ruin motivation to fly more? Does it make you want to fly less? Does it help guys when they have a lower credit month? Does it take away from guys who fly higher credit months? Does it encourage you to use PTO or call in sicka? Would this boost morale to all or cause more division? Thoughts........

Are you saying that with the blended rate the min sked would be 85 hours?

I guess min sched could be whatever manning dictates. If you only flew 70 hours you would get this new pay rate. If you flew 75, 80 or 85 hours the pay rate would still be the same. This might curtail mixed emotions for brothers who are on reserve or for guys who want to PTO schedules but not take a pay hit on the current premium schedule.

Obviously, a pilot who credits 85 hours vs. 75 hours will still make more but it would just be at the same rate. I am just using the Capt. A-320 schedule to show that it would be a mere $10 bump in hourly pay. It would not be a pay raise for 85 hour lines but it would be for 84, 83 ,82...70 hour lines. Only a few dollars in actual money. Although, if you had an 85 hour line and PTO under our current system you take a pay hit. If you had $10 more in base pay (with no premium) and PTO you would NOT take a hit. This might actually help drive people to use FLICA since they will not be inclined to actually make money by calling in sick the last minute. This in turn would help crew services out of many scheduling crisis and possibly smooth out the operation on a day to day basis.

I would suggest to even keep an elevated base pay above 85 with no premium. I know this would upset some (but most do agree).....so if the company still really needs people to try to climb to the 100 credit mark and above it still could use 1.5 over 85.

What I see this does is give us back the 10% in pay we have lost in purchasing power due to inflation since the pay scale took effect. But then denys the permium pay above 70 hours and then makes you wait till 85 to get premium pay.

What we need first is a new base pay raise of 10%, then do the blending and recalculate. Otherwise you give up premium pay between 70-85 just to catch up with inflation below 70 hours.

I like the theory, but we need to fix the base pay rate first for inflation, then blend.

Just my opinion....

FNg

I'll have to think this idea over a bit.

I do have a problem when you say "most do agree". Does that come from a poll of all pilots? Maybe you mean to say of those you've spoken with most agree.

Blue,
You are right. I can only speak from my perspective...I do not have a clear picture of all pilots. I know friends who don't want this because they have many months above the 100 credit mark due to IROPS and manning issues. This idea would lower average hourly pay for those lines.

I wanted to suggest this idea within the confines of the current CASM. It is basically cost neutral to the company. In my opinion, it would eliminate a lot of division on many levels.

How about this?
 

How about a base pay increase, providing we can still post quarterly profits, Leave the 70/70+ premium pay in place.

TRUST ME you won't be on reserve forever. And once off reserve you will love the premium pay. Remember, even as long as reserve can be here, it is nothing compared to reserve at any other company flying similar size aircraft.

Then lets see if we can get the crew scheduling guide to be a bit more 'blue' and make QOL better for reserves. EVERYONE wants to go home at the end of an assigned pairing, especially if they arrive at 0600 and can catch a 2030 flight home but are assigned reserve till 2359. Everyone wants to avoid another night in the crashpad.

Let's work towards restoring Blue Values at Crew Services rather than homogenise the pay scale, and it's inherent positives. A one pay rate will only tend to reduce personal flying hours and raise CASM.

JMHO

Don't misunderstand me....I do love premium pay! My suggestion of an elevated pay scale would be like tipping the van driver $1. It does a lot for morale!

If your effective net hourly base wage was higher and there was only 1 payscale would you honestly not fly as much? Maybe? Maybe not? From my perspective, I don't think it would change bidding habits.

Like I said, some guys don't like it and some do. Maybe your suggestion of a raise under the current system would be more popular. I would like that also.

Whatever increase to the current system we change will increase CASM. The question then becomes what is the net change on CASM. One aspect that I love about our culture is the morale! My fear, which is only from my perspective, is to watch morale go down over the years across the board. I only suggest this change to boost morale at a very very small cost to CASM.

FNG, The following scale is blended at 95 hours.

YEAR 12 $139 to $157
11 $136 to $154
10 $133 to $151
9 $131 to $148
8 $128 to $145
7 $126 to $143
6 $123 to $139
5 $121 to $137
4 $118 to $134
3 $116 to $131
2 $113 to $128
1 $110 to $124

I don't know what the right answer is. Do we use this as the new single pay rate? Do we add 1.5 over 70 on top of this? Do we do nothing?

Realistically, I think a single pay rate blended between 85-95 range would benefit most lines. However, I don't think management will go for a high base rate AND the 1.5 over 70 - It would have to be one or the other (but both would be nice). On this scale at year 12 that would be over $300/hour. If you blend at 95 hours the pay difference now becomes $14-$18/hour. Again, it all comes down to CASM. I don't have the sliding scale to see the EXACT ranges of CASM vs. increase of pay scales. When we speak of pay increases it needs to be justified with what the CASM would be. I do know that the bump in CASM is very very small.

Trick,
It is really interesting to look at your pay numbers and proposal. I think fixing the pay rate first should be our priority as the current scale is where we lost our buying power. That is why I support a 10% increase now to make up what we have lost since Fall 2001. Then an annual cost of living raise to help compensate for future inflation. Now if we do that, it will bring us up to date.

Then if we apply your 85 hour blended rate with premium pay above 85 hours, that should cost no more that the the current system with the 10% raise. That way we fix the pay scale and then fix the issue with premium pay. I think the trick is to do in the right sequence and all pilots are left with more happy no matter what their bid status. Better base rate for those, premium pay remains for those, minimizes cost to JB for those....

Just my opinion....

FNG