Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   ASA/XJT JCBA: No Dual Qual! (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/54949-asa-xjt-jcba-no-dual-qual.html)

Truman_Sparks 11-26-2010 08:58 AM

Easy solution. You want dual qual, pay out vacations, sick, etc on the higher rate. Problem solved.

Nevets 11-26-2010 02:11 PM


Originally Posted by SilverandSore (Post 907048)
Wrong. The blended rate allows the company to pay out vacation, sick time and cancellation at the lower rate. The company saves the pay differential on those things for 500 pilots. You need to read up a little, you're seriously mis-informed.

Just because Skywest does it that way, doesn't mean everybody else is forced to do it the same way. But what I was talking about is one pay rate for all four aircraft types. There wouldn't be a lower rate. That's the whole point of blended rate.

bender 11-26-2010 06:39 PM

SilverandSore

I think you and I have a different view of what constitutes a blended rate. My view is this. If your company has an equal number of CRJ700 and CRJ200 aircraft and the CRJ700 4th year FO rate is $46/hr and the CRJ200 rate is $40/hr then a 4th yr FO is paid $43/hr regardless of which variant he flies. He's paid that rate for sick time, vacation, etc..

SilverandSore 11-26-2010 07:33 PM


Originally Posted by bender (Post 907369)
SilverandSore

I think you and I have a different view of what constitutes a blended rate. My view is this. If your company has an equal number of CRJ700 and CRJ200 aircraft and the CRJ700 4th year FO rate is $46/hr and the CRJ200 rate is $40/hr then a 4th yr FO is paid $43/hr regardless of which variant he flies. He's paid that rate for sick time, vacation, etc..

I got ya now but you're not addressing that it is an increase in responsibility for every one and only a small subjective benefit (QoL). Sure 2/3 get a pay raise but they're doing it at the expense of the 1/3 who will make less, oh and everyone has more responsibility. Again, I'm not saying I can't do it, I just don't want more responsibility for less pay. I also don't want to fly where the 50 flies so that you can get a promise of better schedules. You want to make more? Bid over to the 700. You want to fly fewer legs, bid over. If the union wants to demand a pay rate higher than the 700 pay, well good luck. I think it would be a waste of bargaining capital that could be better spent elsewhere. Oh, and back to my other stupid analogy, why not just blend the captain and FO rates too, is there a difference in your argument then? Everyone flies every seat for the same pay. How far do you want to take this 'blended' track?

SilverandSore 11-26-2010 07:39 PM


Originally Posted by Nevets (Post 907271)
Just because Skywest does it that way, doesn't mean everybody else is forced to do it the same way. But what I was talking about is one pay rate for all four aircraft types. There wouldn't be a lower rate. That's the whole point of blended rate.

Without knowing what each aircraft's new contract pay rate is going to be (which would really make a comparison difficult to achieve) the problem I have with the blended rate is that it rewards the pilots on the smaller aircraft at the expense of the pilots on the larger aircraft. Let's keep it like it should be, paid for based on seats in the aircraft, unless the pay is based on the larger aircraft, ala Delta 757/767. Anything else is just a concession.

I know I keep beating this argument to death, but if you're so big on the blended rate, why not have all pilots fly all seats for the same blended pay rate, is that any different? I'm sure the captains would love this idea? Let's throw seniority out the window and make every one equal.

gtechpilot 11-27-2010 07:06 AM


Originally Posted by SilverandSore (Post 907048)
Wrong. The blended rate allows the company to pay out vacation, sick time and cancellation at the lower rate. The company saves the pay differential on those things for 500 pilots. You need to read up a little, you're seriously mis-informed.

If you use the current Skywest system then what you say is true. It doesn't have to be negotiated that way though. If we can procure QOL and pay benefits in exchange, it would be very worthwhile for the majority of the pilot group.

AtlCSIP 11-27-2010 12:25 PM

I heard dual qual is coming no matter what we want. If that's the case, what steps do we have to take to ensure that it is done beneficially for both the company and the pilot group? Do we even have any bargaining power here?

JetBlast77 11-27-2010 12:58 PM


Originally Posted by AtlCSIP (Post 907616)
I heard dual qual is coming no matter what we want. If that's the case, what steps do we have to take to ensure that it is done beneficially for both the company and the pilot group? Do we even have any bargaining power here?


This is a union based pilot group. Anything like this would have to be voted on by the pilot group before implementation. I would call that some barganing power.

Nevets 11-27-2010 04:46 PM


Originally Posted by SilverandSore (Post 907383)
Without knowing what each aircraft's new contract pay rate is going to be (which would really make a comparison difficult to achieve) the problem I have with the blended rate is that it rewards the pilots on the smaller aircraft at the expense of the pilots on the larger aircraft. Let's keep it like it should be, paid for based on seats in the aircraft, unless the pay is based on the larger aircraft, ala Delta 757/767. Anything else is just a concession.

I know I keep beating this argument to death, but if you're so big on the blended rate, why not have all pilots fly all seats for the same blended pay rate, is that any different? I'm sure the captains would love this idea? Let's throw seniority out the window and make every one equal.

I guess UPS pilots have it all wrong then. Look, one you have one blended rate, you chase QOL in schedules rather than aircraft and it's corresponding pay. You say you don't want to fly to the cities that the 200 goes? Then don't bid those schedules. Seniority is still preserved.

As for your analogy, it's flawed. As an FO in an RJ, you do the same job as an FO in a 747. The responsibility difference is almost all in the seat you are occupying and therefore the captain will always earn more than his FO.

SilverandSore 11-27-2010 07:34 PM


Originally Posted by Nevets (Post 907719)
I guess UPS pilots have it all wrong then. Look, one you have one blended rate, you chase QOL in schedules rather than aircraft and it's corresponding pay. You say you don't want to fly to the cities that the 200 goes? Then don't bid those schedules. Seniority is still preserved.

As for your analogy, it's flawed. As an FO in an RJ, you do the same job as an FO in a 747. The responsibility difference is almost all in the seat you are occupying and therefore the captain will always earn more than his FO.


I've already used the UPS analogy in this thread. We aren't UPS and the way this is being presented is as a benefit, which it very likely will not be, we don't even know if the company is inclined to go the blended route of the override route, but history is on my side, Skywest uses an override. If the blended rate is higher than the current 700 rate plus whatever increase the new contract offers, I am all for it. Otherwise, no thanks, I'm not interested in this concession.

As for my analogy, many corporate departments use co-captains where they swap seats during the trip for same pay, remember, it's blended, it's all even in the end. Isn't that really best for you to have all your options?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:36 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands