Originally Posted by ReasonableMan (Post 1205574)

That is the problem. It seems the NO voters are trying to make the case for getting C2K back in its entirety without realizing C2K was not sustainable! It was a poor management decision that resulted in part bankruptcy by the company, an almost hostile takeover, and a ****ed of pilot group. I too want C2K, but only if I can keep it! It is attainable but we have to build the company to a point that it can sustain it. That's better for all. Beyond that is also attainable and sustainable in due time.

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1205600)

As a no voter, C2K rates are not my goal. SWA rates up front, either at signing or at the amenable date would turn me. They're our prime competitor in many domestic markets.

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1205603)

Down to which aircraft? Do you want this for MD88 and up? Or all the way down to the B717?

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1205614)

The MD-90 seats 160. I would prefer that...I would prefer "narrow body pay", but that's a separate discussion. Bottom line, B737 pay parity from Day 1.

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1205614)

The MD-90 seats 160. I would prefer that...I would prefer "narrow body pay", but that's a separate discussion. Bottom line, B737 pay parity from Day 1.

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1205618)

Yeah I'm open to wide body, long narrow body, short narrow body system.

Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1205626)

I guess you like your pay now because with those demands you will be shelved by the NMB for a long time then it will take parity plus another 15-20% to make up for the time value of money.SW got to where they are by taking small raises every year along with profit sharing. One of the things they have is raises tied to operating margin, maybe a double edged sword but an interesting concept. I think working for a consistently profitable company helps also.

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1205600)

[rant]

As a no voter, C2K rates are not my goal. SWA rates up front, either at signing or at the amenable date would turn me. They're our prime competitor in many domestic markets.

[/rant]

Originally Posted by ReasonableMan (Post 1205632)

Even if it's not sustainable and you will lose that or even more shortly after receiving it? Are you willing to risk your career and lively hood over $5 more per hour? That's not very logical.

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1205635)

That's where we disagree. I think it is sustainable, as it has been for SWA, UPS and FedEx. If one carrier raises the bar, others will follow and pilot costs will be a commodity to pay just like oil.