mulcher

But it only matters for CAs rates. We don’t talk about that stuff on FO rates. Also, I’ve seen the MCBP used at least 3 different ways to justify the rates. Some might want to realize why it went from 1-2%.

ZapBrannigan

The way I understand it, we have industry leading FO pay by percentage of Captain pay. The fact that FOs now more closely match 757 pay at other airlines is just math - it's an artificial result from the higher percentage of Captain pay.

I guess I just don't see the problem. We fixed the year 2-5 shortfall which should have been fixed a decade ago, and they get a higher percentage of Captain pay - well deserved considering the workload this company puts on right seaters.

Zard

I have my issues with this TA (hotel language, food availability, co-terminals, CA rates), but this is absolutely correct. I watched a turn yesterday that, had LCO been implementedDOR if this thing passed, would have paid over 20 for operating one leg.

Original trip was to Deadhead out, operate one back. This turned into Deadhead out, operate one somewhere else, deadhead back. This then turned into a double deadhead on the backside and changed once more to two different deadheads back. Between the 1xleg multiplier on every changed leg since they blocked in later than the original leg back, plus long duty override, plus holiday override, the day would have paid well over 20 for one leg. I'm not sure if late arrival override would have come into play, but that would have added another tfp if it did. I have to re-read if that only applies to the original pairing or if it's any pairing regardless of changes.

All of this stuff is being done manually. Skysolver has no idea how expensive its solutions are, and scheduling won't catch on for a while. The addiction to reroutes is finally going to cause the company financial pain. In the short term, should this TA pass, the pilots will be rewarded for the extra risk we take on for the changes to what we bid. In the long term, maybe (hahahahahahaha) SWA will wean themselves off their addiction to treating us all like online reserves.

mulcher

It wasn’t artificial at all. I am all for FOs getting 75 rates as I am for CAs getting the same. You can’t believe the company didn’t know exactly what they were doing. How do you think the FOs would have felt if they received 75 rates but the percentages were slightly lower than they are now? Plus the CAs got 75 rates? The company knew fixing percentages first would put FO rates were they ended up. Then the company says we can’t afford anymore the 73+1 for CAs and SWApull fell for it. They now use every excuse to justify it. Listening to the podcast they glossed over the disparity. It was chess vs checkers. It’s far cheaper to put the rates where they are now than both seats at leading NB pay.

ZapBrannigan

well, I appreciate the respectful debate, but I'm afraid we'll have to disagree on this point. I doubt the company reps were sharp enough to do what you are suggesting. We could ask during the road shows. In my opinion they set Captain rates and then applied the percentage to determine FO rates. That's how it's done everywhere.

Smooth at FL450

I'm good with some of my more valuable gold nuggets being tucked away hiding behind LCO and stackable overrides than out in the open in the form of pay rates. Which do you think the bankruptcy judge would go for first?

WHACKMASTER

Exactly ^^^^. I’m pretty sure the FO rates being at 757 level were just coincidental.

🔥👇

Cyio

Except we have industry leading rates for our class of aircraft. Its not like we are shorted money, if we were I could understand your argument.

mulcher

But that’s not how they did it. The increase in FO percentages were done first followed by rates. Hence the bloated difference. I don’t give Karl much credit for anything. But he knew exactly how that was going to work. Then the claimed we can’t afford 75 rates for CAs because of how it would affect FO rates with the higher percentages. They save on those rates compounding on CAs rates this contract and future contracts. Have a good one!

Hard No

Like always, we want to flog ourselves and say we screwed up. We didn't. Framed another way, the OAL 757 FO's are paid 737 FO wages....that we just set. I don't know why this has to be a negative.