You're a 4
#11
The difference on between your ask and the current offer on DOS would be $123/month, or a net of about $70/month. ($35 per paycheck)
The second year gap grows to a gross of about $329/month. I'll estimate a difference per paycheck of about $100.
I can't imagine that this amount of money could tip the scales.
(The above is based on 744 FO pay at 80 hours per month.)
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 758
Really?!?
The difference on between your ask and the current offer on DOS would be $123/month, or a net of about $70/month. ($35 per paycheck)
The second year gap grows to a gross of about $329/month. I'll estimate a difference per paycheck of about $100.
I can't imagine that this amount of money could tip the scales.
(The above is based on 744 FO pay at 80 hours per month.)
The difference on between your ask and the current offer on DOS would be $123/month, or a net of about $70/month. ($35 per paycheck)
The second year gap grows to a gross of about $329/month. I'll estimate a difference per paycheck of about $100.
I can't imagine that this amount of money could tip the scales.
(The above is based on 744 FO pay at 80 hours per month.)
#13
T, there won't be much of a next time after we have 325 EMB-170/175, CRJ-700 and MORE 90-seat CRJ-900 with long term lease agreements. I know quite a few pilots at other airlines and no one is proud of the fact we are trading tired 50-seaters for what will be the worst scope in the industry. Mark my word, should this TA pass it will embolden management teams all over to shift the line in the sand and the fallout will be THOUSANDS of 90-seat jets paying a quarter of what a fNWA pilot made under a BK contract flying a DC-9-30. As far as getting them next time, our only chance is now. The only thing this TA and the Moakster will represent for our profession is broke D-scale pilots operating mainline equipment at $80/hr left seat and $24/hr right seat.
Lastly, a certain type of economic event rears its head about every 7 years, I wouldn't bank on favorable conditions in three years. I am connecting the dots, just differently than you. As far as the TA as a whole, too many caveats for management, they will exploit them.
Lastly, a certain type of economic event rears its head about every 7 years, I wouldn't bank on favorable conditions in three years. I am connecting the dots, just differently than you. As far as the TA as a whole, too many caveats for management, they will exploit them.
#15
I'm fine with the 4/8/3/3 if the rest of the contract was as "robust" as stated.
255 jumbo RJs going to 325, RAH carveout, DPJ carveout, 4.5 ADG (wn gets 6), minimal vacation improvement (regionals typically get 30 more minutes per vacation day than us), and so on...
255 jumbo RJs going to 325, RAH carveout, DPJ carveout, 4.5 ADG (wn gets 6), minimal vacation improvement (regionals typically get 30 more minutes per vacation day than us), and so on...
#16
T, there won't be much of a next time after we have 325 EMB-170/175, CRJ-700 and MORE 90-seat CRJ-900 with long term lease agreements. I know quite a few pilots at other airlines and no one is proud of the fact we are trading tired 50-seaters for what will be the worst scope in the industry. Mark my word, should this TA pass it will embolden management teams all over to shift the line in the sand and the fallout will be THOUSANDS of 90-seat jets paying a quarter of what a fNWA pilot made under a BK contract flying a DC-9-30. As far as getting them next time, our only chance is now. The only thing this TA and the Moakster will represent for our profession is broke D-scale pilots operating mainline equipment at $80/hr left seat and $24/hr right seat.
Lastly, a certain type of economic event rears its head about every 7 years, I wouldn't bank on favorable conditions in three years. I am connecting the dots, just differently than you. As far as the TA as a whole, too many caveats for management, they will exploit them.
Lastly, a certain type of economic event rears its head about every 7 years, I wouldn't bank on favorable conditions in three years. I am connecting the dots, just differently than you. As far as the TA as a whole, too many caveats for management, they will exploit them.
#17
I'm confused; what's this 90 seat airplane ? We have a limit at 76 seats so I don't get your post at all. We will have less RJ's and less RJ pilots with the TA. We gave up the 76 seat aircraft years ago, it is not and will never be a mainline aircraft because to bring it to mainline would be very costly. Probably require a pay cut from all mainline pilots to cover cost and I doubt you would ever get a majority to vote for that.
#18
The premise of the original question was if the first number were greater, the other things would be easier to choke down.
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
Really?!?
The difference on between your ask and the current offer on DOS would be $123/month, or a net of about $70/month. ($35 per paycheck)
The second year gap grows to a gross of about $329/month. I'll estimate a difference per paycheck of about $100.
I can't imagine that this amount of money could tip the scales.
(The above is based on 744 FO pay at 80 hours per month.)
The difference on between your ask and the current offer on DOS would be $123/month, or a net of about $70/month. ($35 per paycheck)
The second year gap grows to a gross of about $329/month. I'll estimate a difference per paycheck of about $100.
I can't imagine that this amount of money could tip the scales.
(The above is based on 744 FO pay at 80 hours per month.)