More Hawaiian A330's showing up at JFK.:rolleyes:

Not sure if this was a serious answer or if you can read proficiently, but I asked what PILOT PRODUCTIVITY changes the company wanted?

Do you need me to fully explain how my question doesn't have to do with code-sharing or interline agreements?

Right now open trips must sit in opentime on flica for at least one hour. Company wants to immediately assign these to a reserve pilot.

The current rules benefits the line holder. Management would essentially take away a method that many use to earn extra income. Assigned to areserve saves the company money since reserves are essentially salaried employees. This could really bite them during an irop!

GP

Ah, this is what I was asking. Any other productivity/workrule changes they are seeking?

I have no idea if there is any truth to this but I heard they wanted to bump the premium pay trigger to something higher as well as institute a cap on the monthly credit a pilot can earn.

Caps are the opposite of "productivity", the most productive you can be is to fly to FAR maximums, not sure I would believe that part of a rumor if I was in your shoes...

Currently everything is on the table. Premium pay is a big topic. Merit pay/NPS is another. Daily minimums vs averages. Block time vs flight time.

Then there are the larger items like domestic code sharing and exploiting the loops holes in the PEA. Keep in mind you have a perceived
voice in international code sharing but none for domestic. There is no limit. The only issue is the potential uproar from the pilot ranks.

What the Jetblue pilot group must understand now more than ever is any pay raise you receive is worthless when you will be out of a job in three years. What do I mean? As a Jetblue pilot you have no scope provision or domestic code share restriction. What management is currently suggesting is a large percentage raise in return for a blessing on these issues.

Legacy carriers out smarted pilot groups in the past with this and look what happened with regional carriers. Jetblue is taking much the same stance.We need to learn from our peers past mistakes.

Scope, T/E language and code sharing CANNOT be compromised.

Hawaiian Airlines at T5 is a gross exploitation of the PEA loophole and one Jetblue intends on continuing. There is only one way to prevent this.

Cap on premium, not total compensated hours. Let's say prem. trigger from 88-100. After 100 credit, straight pay.

I agree with u Benz. It's better scope or the unemployment line. The legacies outsource a huge part of their domestic flying.. We are in trouble if we continue this and/or get purchased. I could care less about retirement or premium pay if we have minimal scope.. That's just my opinion tho.

If you guys havent noticed premium doesnt exist for more than half of the pilot group.

Combine all your pay for the month and the divide it by total hours flown. If you fly 83 hours a month on second year pay Your blended pay rate is like an extra 2 dollars an hour. It also creates a system where the company benefits from creating 20 hour 4 days and you only get 14 days off while only getting 83 hours.

Premium needs to go(with appropriate pay raise) in favor of a system similar to the delta slip program.

I agree.

Premium Pay:
Don't forget it's a big benefit for the company as well. They want to keep the PP system in place, they just don't want guys milking it every month. The premium system is like having 25% more pilots sitting around without having to actually carry 25% more pilots (good for when those IROPS and pesky peak flying months roll around). Personally, I don't place a lot of value on the premium system. It's nice to have the ability to make extra money, but I'm certainly not willing to let the company turn it into a bargaining chip.

Merit Pay/NPS: This is a whole 'nother world as it relates to regular compensation and I don't want to be part of the group that introduced this concept to our career. I don't even like it being tied to a profit sharing program.

You must read the latest investor conference call. Joanna Gherity made mention of how they don't want employees paid based on seniority beyond a certain year. Past a certain year your raise will be tied to various "measurable" metrics. She claims we can't fall into that legacy mentality by paying for experience.
The company is looking for ways to implement this sort of system for pilots. Frankly, this is the least of our worries. Having AA or anyone else take over our flying or being bought out is a mug greater concern.

Yeah, I agree scope is #1.
The way I read the domestic codeshare provision in the PPA though is that it's subject to the two year limitation also (unless the PVC consents otherwise). But barring that, it appears we have some control (not as much control as we should have, but not zero). We've already let the genie out of the bottle pretty much though, and if we're serious about the longterm at JB, we're gonna have to battle to close those provisions.
Also, how do we justify being the only US major pilot group that gets away without having to give up a domestic codeshare? If we can't hold on to it all ourselves, we need to be getting some reciprocal ASM's in exchange. Sad that its heading this way, but...

Benzo,
My guess is the performance based pay would be more along the lines of what Alaska currently offers. There are bonuses tied to on-time performance etc. for the entire work group. I don't think it would or could be tied to individual pilot metrics, this would open a can of worms and most certainly lead to representation, and corruption with favoritism...etc, etc....as I have mentioned before the ALPA cards would fly in if they try to individualize the performance based pay.

CR clearly you have forgotten who you work for;)

They've already done it to the FA's so talk continues with flops.

Dear god, who WANTS to work 100 hours? I'd like to actually see my family. If they wanna set that limit post-100 hours, depending on what we'd get in return for that, I'd be willing to let that go.

I agree. There are plenty of pilots at JB crediting well over 100 every month. 120 - 150 is pretty much the norm for quite a few.

I have credited 95 or better every month this year. I could see well over 100 if I lived in base.

Clayton Osbon did 150+ a month, how did that work out?

To get that much time and some time at home you need to be top 10% in base. I am 40% in JFK live in base and I get about 100 with 15-16 days off, but I am not the norm and live in base.

Funny how the latest PAR team email failed to mention retirement, profit sharing, medical expenses, and vacation in our "compensation bucket."

Riddle it didn't fail to mention it. At the outset of this process management, which later became the PAR, made it clear the only thing you would receive this year is a pay raise. Ill see if I can find the emails.
In my opinion JetBlue is convinced it can sway 50.1% of the pilot group with a simple pay raise. Keep in mind, as the recent PAR email alluded, significant give backs in the form of code sharing are expected in addition to other work rule related items.
Insurance isn't to be discussed as they have already made those determinations for next year. The changes were part of a 3-4 year plan so the only number we anticipate is the percentage increase. Feel free to contact the comp and benefits people on that one.
Lastly you are industry standard in the remaining items.

From SVP Martin March 18:

That new landscape also changes and challenges our ability to compete successfully for growth. To assist in funding compensation increases and remain competitive as the industry changes, we either need to cut existing budgets in other areas across the business, implement Pilot productivity offsets or find new opportunities to create additional revenue. We prefer the latter. More revenue is good for all of us. It means more aircraft, more hiring, more upgrades and Quality of Life enhancements.

While there are many issues of interest to discuss, we simply cannot cover every topic in the next few months. We must prioritize and determine what to address first, second, third and so on - and we believe the compensation package is number one on everyone’s list right now.



In short you will receive a pay raise offset by code sharing on domestic routes and fly more days.

Wait a minute. They want to talk about everything else. They used the phrase "compensation bucket" not me.

All of that is compensation.


They are talking about a comprehensive review! Comprehensive by its very definition means what??

They are trying to tie codeshare to this pay raise. How should we not tie ALL compensation to it too.

That email from Jeff is old news when they were trying to push forward without a protocol agreement.

You forgot to highlight the part where additional codesharing would lead to " More revenue is good for all of us. It means more aircraft, more hiring, more upgrades and Quality of Life enhancements."

We would certainly be the lower cost, more productive airline and pilot group in any 2-way codeshare (AA).

I am hopeful the protocal agreement lets us vote seperately on codeshare changes vs payrates.

The protocol agreement is to hold the their feet to the fire.

While the code share may bring more revenue it certainly doesn't creat more flying for JetBlue pilots. It simply takes a route that a 320/190 can do, per the PPA, and allow another carrier to do that flying. This isn't the watershed idea managements emails allude to.

Remember Jetblues network is "open architecture" which simply means outsourcing. Allow someone else to do a job you can do for less money, headache, training... Pick a reason.

Its a TWO WAY codeshare. TWO WAY. So you are saying that AA and JB management, through their collaboration and planning, would have the MORE expensive and LESS productive group do the lion's share of the new flying?

Look, I am not saying I want substantial codesharing, and no say in the codesharing. But I am not as convinced that WE will be the big losers in an AA codeshare. I also think it is niave and misleading to suggest that if we don't allow any codesharing, management will be forced to order a whole bunch of new airplanes to fly those routes that we wouldn't let them codeshare on.....

Also, if a big mega-carrier (biggest in the world) wants to code-share with us, the same one we have been taking their flying from for years, and we say no-thanks, they may have a pretty aggressive anti-cooperative and anti-jetBlue response waiting for us.... Maybe it isn't smart to poke the BIG BEAR in the eye at this stage of our existince over some routes that we might otherwise overlap on or be unprofitable for us both to serve at the same time....

Again, us forcing management to not codeshare will NOT force them to order a bunch more airplanes and grow faster than they want....

Yes, I am pro-union.

I am no airline CEO. I am not even an internet airline CEO like some guys on here pretend to be. I do not get NDA PVC information regarding routes, plans, projections. My views on codesharing are not set in stone. I do NOT want significant, unlimited codesharing without pilot consent...

So make a thoughtful response to my point by point concerns and will listen. Scare-mongering does NOT work on me.

More flying at what cost? I hear the revenue stream is anticipated at 100 million. With the least restrictive code sharing, JB will become dependant on the income and will end up having to compete, or bid for further revenue with other potential carriers. Thus will end up with a chunk of flying that puts JB into a Regional carrier status. Your future will be competing against lowest bidder. Sound familiar?
Even if the flying isn't threatened, you will hear from leadership the threat of losing revenue if you are paid too much. Have fun with that!

Yes the economics on the American deal favor us right now. What about when Republic opens up an independent brand that operates E190's for way less. Oh wait they already do. Two way code share goes both ways.

Better to keep that genie in the bottle if able. It certainly hasnt hurt the southwest guys.

I think that any potential CS that JB was counting on will be lost, now that the US/AA merger happened. I would think Parker would use what USair already has?

I agree. This AA/JB Codeshare will be a moot topic soon when Parker turns us down and uses PHL as the northeast connect hub. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me to see the new AA re-focus on BOS and winning back what they gave up to JetBlue.

+1 on both of these.

And remember its up to us to consider each thing seperately as per the protocol. JB will try to present it all lumped together to get you to feel like it's a package deal, but it's not.

PEA Amendments: most obviously will include Pay rates, Premium Trigger. JB can survey pilots, solicit PVC input, but they can offer whatver they want to the pilots. You show your approval or disapproval with your pen. If the rates are not good enough, don't sign it. JB will be left in a position where they will still be underpaying pilots, and guys will be leaving. And that's a problem they'll still be forced to fix.

Code Sharing: This is PPA. Any changes JB/PVC eventually pound out must get sent to us for a vote. And we are free to say no. It's seperate to pay. They will try to paint a no vote as causing grevious harm to the company, by denying them access to huge revenue stream,but this will be a career vote for us. (Btw, we were supposed to be closing the gaps in the 5 docs, not widening them.) At the end of the day though, I don't think it's realistic to expect us to have zero code-sharing. It's gonna be more about the protections and guarantees we get, to prevent the whole thing from de-volving into a lowest-bidder mess. And us understanding that authorizing something like this will mean our route map probably won't look much different than it currently does in the future.

Quick questions, what prevents jetBlue from giving better pay rates for everyone without a vote or to any new hires and what prevents them from offering new hires signing bonuses.

Nothing prevents them from doing that.

By the way, why do you prefer a regressive tax system?

The prebate makes it progressive. Some will pay a tax rate that is negative and on the other extreme, some will pay 23% (these are inclusive rates). The fact that the percentage is different depending on your wealth makes it progressive.

haven't done your homework on that one...

www.fairtax.org

Despite what that website says, the Fairtax is not regressive. It's simple math.

From the middle income level and up, I believe it is more regressive than that website shows. It is common sense. Those at the lower end of the income spectrum (forget the very poor because of the prebate) spend more/most of their incomes and save very little. As income approaches the super rich level, they spend more money, but a much smaller percentage of their income each year. They save and invest much higher percentages of their income, thus avoiding taxation all together.