Right.....1.2% is currently actual..... coming out of a recession.
This is business 101 guys, cement raises at the bottom of, or prior to, the recovery while expectations are low.
They are trying to get recessionary increases right as the recession is ending.
Then, when inflation goes back to a more normal 3-4%, (and maybe more due to the M3 stimulus)
pilots are stuck with actually making relatively less while they raise ticket prices relative to the
new 3-4% inflation rate, increasing net income at the pilot's expense.







Hopefully the Skywest guys can see through this because they're treating you like you're ignorant.
I can't imagine any educated professional actually agreeing to take a depressed economy contract right as we're coming out of it....
Don't believe me? Put in a clause that the raises are tied to CPI increases.
They'll say no even though everything else they pay for, and charge for, will be tied to it.
They believe you'll take it because you're in fear of losing your pilot job, or,
believe the current CPI/unemployment numbers will continue/get worse, or,
don't understand that we're right at the point of the airlines having pricing power.
Any other supplier would say it's not their job to take a relative loss to fund the airline.
It's time for pilots to stop funding the airline's profit increases.
Rant/

 

Pinnacle voted down a TA better than this.

 

3% to alpo will seem like chump change with your new medical benefits and itty bitty pay raise.

 

ALPA dues are 1.95%...

 

JD, I really respect a lot of the things you have said on the message boards. I don't always agree, but I respect your opinion. However, this time, I have got to say that is the biggest Kool-Aid drinking response I've read in a while.

I found the e-mail yesterday to be an insult to the hard work I put in on a daily basis as well as that of my fellow pilots. I am getting TDYed around the system to cover their lack of staffing on a weekly basis, and what they come to offer me is 1% for my trouble? But hey, when you sit reserve 12 hours out of base and not get called (which I have never been called on TDY), I will get paid 3:57 towards guarantee now instead of 3:45. WOW. Not only that, but as a reserve, thanks to our pathetic MDG increase, I am going to get hurt whenever I need to take user time or vacation because I won't accrue it any faster, but I will get charged for it faster. Oh wait, how wonderful is that? That means their liabilities will be reduced at a greater rate then they are replenished, and it may cost them a few more dollars now, but it helps the bottom line on the call.

How about they fix all the ways CS can screw us over on pay? International repos, when Sked+ does not pick up an overblock flight, reflows that have taken me 3 or 4 phone calls to get paid for the higher of the two days (those glorious line holder months that I've had), anything else that might require an Appendix D, and especially the ORD parking brake issue. Take your pick. None of those concerns were addressed. If you don't think they will find ways to make this cost neutral to them, I fear you will be surprised. This isn't a pay package. This is an insult.

My vote is a resounding NO. And when ALPA comes knocking on my door, my vote will be a YES.

This is my first sober post in a long time (sitting TDY reserve in DEN after all) and I really hope a lot of the other OO guys are as mad as I am, and I hope they speak with the only voice they have an vote this awful thing down.

 

Thanks for the detailed post. Not many of us ever take the time to post such a detailed point of view, especially with graphs to support an argument. Usually responses are one or two sentence sarcastic comments.

The only things I would point out in response to your post is:

1) Skywest pilots already get a pay raise every 1 year anniversary of their hire date. Your data does not account for these annual raises. I don't really care to argue semantics over what the word "raise" means. But suffice it to say, my paycheck gets bigger every twelve months regardless of whether we agree to take 1% more from management.

2) Skywest is a non-union, non-ALPO, airline. Management has NO contract with us, and we have NO contract with management. We are free to "accept" the 1% offered today by management, and we can go back and start knocking on their door for more money tomorrow. We are not locked-in to anything. We are not foregoing a turn around in the economy next month or next year. The other pilot groups that agree to 5 or 7 year deals are locking themselves in - we are not.

3) There are very few service industries where providers in those markets can continually, annually, raise their prices to consumers by an appropriate CPI percentage to accommodate contractually agreed increased labor expenses. In the airline business 2 or 3% margins are the difference between success and failure.

If you can get airline consumers to agree to a 1.2% ticket price increase today, with a 3-4% increase year after year going into the future, I vote for you and Pedro for President and Vice-President.

Boiler . . . thanks for the clarification on the ALPO dues, but in my opinion, 1.95% is still too much by 1.95% If you are happy with them, great. Choice is a wonderful thing.

By choice I work for a non-ALPO carrier and my next airline job will be with a non-ALPO carrier.

 

My fellow Skywest brother, I sympathize with you, truly I do. I have walked in your shoes and I know what you are going through.

I only offer this, if you as an individual vote NO and we as a pilot group vote NO, the only thing that is going to change is you and I will be doing exactly what we are doing now, but for 1% less.

Your schedule, your quality of life is going to stay exactly the same as it is now, regardless of whether you take the 1% or leave the 1%.

This pay "proposal" has zero to do with quality of life issues.

Peace, fly safe.

 

I respect your opinion, but 1% would be a nominal increase to my paycheck and although I respect our management team, I would rather tell them that I think they can do much better than take the $30ish per month this would equate to. If we're an industry leading company and we are continuously praised for going above and beyond, then why aren't we compensated that way? Klen and Chip can crank out TFAYD (I hate how often that term is used on the SAPA sight, I digress) emails but when it came time to thank us, I feel let down. This pay package puts us almost smack dab in the middle of the pack which I feel is not a testament to management putting their money where their proverbial mouth is.

I also disagree that neither side is locked into anything. Without a true collective bargaining unit, how would you propose we would approach management and ever ask for more money? There is absolutely no bark to our bite and although I'm not saying I'm a pro-union guy, you must realize the futility of even thinking about a raise without a union drive or scheduled pay negotiations.

Lastly, although you thanked others for their mature responses, you continue to refer to ALPA as ALPO which is rhetoric and contradicts your sentiments. I don't mean to sound critical, just highlighting the points on which our views seem to differ.

Fly safely

 

Why don't SkyWest pilots just take the raise and vote in a union at first chance.

The previous poster is right... if it is voted down, the pilots will do the exact same thing without the extra money. What good does shooting down this pay raise? Nothing.

It is insulting, I agree. But let's face it, SkW is never going to pay more than they have to. Without an organized pilot group, what are the pilots to do? A slow down? "Fly-the-contract" work action type thing? Never going to happen!

So, what's the point? Take the money. An extra $1500-$3000 year is better than most. The work rules are the only place SkW is ever going to lead the pack on.

 

Those are your reasons for voting in favor? I'm scared.