Its the same rate. Exactly the same rate (because its a DC-9).

You like that same rear view mirror as Slowplay does too.

So I'll humour you. Doug Parker just raised the comps in the neighborhood. He is valuing US and AA the same as us. Smisek just couldn't contain his man chowder when he was briefed on our TA and he quickly held it as an example to his pilots as a doable deal.

We have taken the lowball offer. We are excepting much less than the median on the survey while funding the substandard increase by cutting profit sharing. We can do better and if the MEC keeps insisting that this is the best we can do, then time for a new MEC.

I think you mean the USAir A320 Captains would make what our 320 FOs would make.

We all know Parker. Enough said on that. And Smizek would have to increase his pilot pay costs 40% at least. Look at our proposed 744 and 777 rates. How many do we have currently? 16 of each? UA has 100 of them total, 70 777s (both UA and CAL), and I believe twice the 744s we have. All of them, thousands of pilots, move up $50 an hour? Then they have horrible work rules. How much will that cost? A huge, huge amount. To top it off, they had a bad 1st quarter. You can bet a certain CEO we know knows all of this, and bringing up pay by about 20% over 3 years also is a strategic move to affect competitors too who may HAVE TO raise their own groups' rates.

Nice try. Hawaiian bundles 767 and A330 pay. If DALPA had been trying to raise the bar instead of doing the limbo, would we not have the same bundle in this TA?

Be nice to have 767 pilots making 199 hour over the last couple years but better yet would be a bundled rate at the 767/ a330/ 767-400 level, but DALPA missed that one too.

Opps.

Should I keep going?

And given the work rule changes requiring 15% fewer reserves, he'll probably get MD'd off the 320.

Not exactly. You're focusing in on one component and leaving out the rest (staffing formula, extra X-day, early retirement), oh and the block hour ratio.

With the TA and all other things being equal there will be 30-40 additional mainine aircraft on board at a minimum. If there are fewer than that he would have been displaced anyway under our current agreement. He would also have no size restrictions on DCI and less furlough protection in large RJ seat removal in that scenario.

So he gets better upside and better downside. But you can't get past 70, so it doesn't matter to you.;)

Do the 320s do 3 day trips from DTW or MSP to the West Coast and back with an allnighter? That 10 hour and 30 min trip just went to 13:30 in the TA. Does that mean a slight increase in manning? Yup. It gets line holders closer to that ALV, meaning there will need to be more line holders to fill the same number of trips.

From the union:

Q: Won’t the increased max reserve (as high as 99 hours if the ALV is 84) mean that every reserve pilot will fly more, reducing the need for as many reserve pilots?

A: No. The increase to max reserve resolves the situation in a category with long trips in which a reserve pilot with, for example, 30 hours for the month cannot be assigned even a single rotation without taking him above the ALV, which is currently max reserve. The staffing formula is designed to require enough reserve pilots to cover about 60 hours of flying each. In any rolling 12-month period, if the average reserve pilot flies less than 60 hours, the staffing formula requires incrementally fewer reserve pilots in succeeding months. If, on the other hand, the average reserve pilot flies more than 60 hours, the formula requires incrementally more reserve pilots. The more reserve pilots fly, the more reserve pilots are required. In other words, if the increase to max reserve causes reserve pilots to fly more, the staffing formula will in turn require more reserve pilots, which will subsequently reduce the average flown by reserves.

But then, so are the expansion RJs.:confused: