Pay: B737 vs. A320
 

With 148 seats on the A320 and the -800, I see that NWA pilots took a hit on A320 payrates vs. the DAL 737 payrates. Of course management wouldn't want to correlate pay with responsibility and the number of human lives on board and so therefore overlooked the common sense of it. If pay is to be calculated largely by lift capacity and other such factors, then there needs to be a huge correction for aircraft that are designed to be lighter and more efficient; a composite aircraft will never weigh the same as an aluminum one. Let's be realistic, the one design is 15 years older than the other.

I imagine this is the reason the 787 payrates are where they are because of lift capacity. Great, so the manufacturers come out with lighter, smarter, composite aircraft and we as the line pilot take a pay hit; what sense does that make? Must make sense to L.M.

Rotorhead - Look at the MD88 and MD90 rates. That will make you feel better. The A319 has 124 seats, the MD88 142 and the MD90 seats 150.

Also, Delta has none of the 737-700's yet, meaning, Delta has not staffing for those airplanes yet.

The pay rates reflect a potential SLI methodology. Given the size of DAL's MD88/90 fleet, this could be an important distinction.

Rotorhead, The 800 at Delta seats 160. 16 in first and 144 in coach. They removed seats for a while so they could take off the 4th flight attendant. I believe all aircraft have had all the seats restored. If you look at the average number of seats in the 319/320 fleet is probably under 140.

..........

Really? What SLl methodology do they reflect? Could you post your source?

Carl

I've heard that before too, Carl. I believe it was done in the past, but I don't know enough to say the carrier with any factual accuracy.

I believed it used a "slotting" methodology...basically you say OK...these are the number of "job slots" each carrier is bringing to the table...and you rank them either by aircraft lift - or size - or pay.

Just for an example..totally made up...you stick the 747 and 777 at the top and say OK...that is X number of jobs...X number are NWA jobs and X number are DAL jobs...so then you take whatever number of seats that is and use that ratio to assign the top seniority numbers.

Then you do the same with the 767-400/A330 Again...set ratios...figure how many seat-jobs that is, and sort it accordingly between DAL and NWA.

Then the 767-300

Then 757

Then 737

Then A320

Then MD90

Then MD80

Then DC-9

When you finish the 9...you have merged everyone.

It is not straight percentage and it is not DOH. It is based on what "jobs" each carrier brings to the table.

Oh, FWIW...I believe that methodology would be unfair to NWA pilots, despite the amount of "Premium Widebody" flying you guys have available. :D Sorry, I can't resist using that every chance I get.

Carl:

Quick & Dirty

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/A...3052&Tabid=256
Here's more information if you really want to know
http://crewroom.alpa.org/aaa/Desktop...cumentID=21671

What does any of that have to do with your previous statement:

"The pay rates reflect a potential SLI methodology."

What SLI methodology was used to determine pay rates in this TA? If you don't know, then what documents state your premise? Does the new TA state that? Does LOA 19 say that?

Carl

Just read the links to ALPA policy.

OK. So what you're really saying is: "I'm just making this stuff up and I really wish people would stop questioning my musings."

I'll try to stop questioning you BB...muse away. :D

Carl