![]() |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 3504673)
I don't think he's saying to fix everyone's pay and leave 1st year crap...
But maybe you're saying fix 1st year and not give everyone else a raise? Otherwise I don't understand the argument. Management needs to fix 1st year pay, the union says "yes, and also bring everyone else up to current market". Not hard. Not hard. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3504691)
And I’m saying, sure - bring first year pay up ti $150 an hour with a 75 MMG and full insurance from day one of intro if they want to raise first year pay. It’ll make backfilling attrition four times as expensive as it is for management now. Make current levels of attrition unaffordable for management. Then they’ll HAVE TO negotiate higher pay. As it is right now, the very cheapness of backfilling with newbies is keeping the company from having to address attrition.
Not hard. Imagine if our NC came on yesterday and said “we have entered into an agreement with management to give first year only, raises to $150 an hour for first year. You will take a pay cut for second year, so yeah, but hey, we made first year so expensive, they will now have to pay everyone more money” Of course, because it’s clearly cheaper to pay everyone more money than first year $150/hr. Thank you Jesus, thanks for keeping Cargo away from the grown up table. |
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
(Post 3504695)
^^^^And this right here is why we should all pray to our God tonight, thankful Cargo isn’t let anywhere close to the decision desk for any of the negotiations.
Imagine if our NC came on yesterday and said “we have entered into an agreement with management to give first year only, raises to $150 an hour for first year. You will take a pay cut for second year, so yeah, but hey, we made first year so expensive, they will now have to pay everyone more money” Of course, because it’s clearly cheaper to pay everyone more money than first year $150/hr. Thank you Jesus, thanks for keeping Cargo away from the grown up table. Because you’ve been singing that same song for over four years and it ain’t worked yet. But I do appreciate your piety. 😉 |
Originally Posted by CLE to IAH
(Post 3504661)
it’s one thing to use a funny photo but since this is the ACTUAL photo of Excargodog this needs to be removed. Mods, please remove this photo since this is the actual photo of him!!!! |
Originally Posted by Halon1211
(Post 3504742)
THIS PHOTO NEEDS TO BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY!!!!
it’s one thing to use a funny photo but since this is the ACTUAL photo of Excargodog this needs to be removed. Mods, please remove this photo since this is the actual photo of him!!!! |
Originally Posted by MCDUmanipulator
(Post 3504550)
wish I was joking. They pretty clearly stated the company’s economic proposal dealt with first year and training pay to attract new pilots.
But the take away from the zoom call really should not be that the company only wants to increase first year and training pay. Even management knows that would not fly. It was the first week guys. Our NC is negotiating from strength. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3504691)
And I’m saying, sure - bring first year pay up ti $150 an hour with a 75 MMG and full insurance from day one of intro if they want to raise first year pay. It’ll make backfilling attrition four times as expensive as it is for management now. Make current levels of attrition unaffordable for management. Then they’ll HAVE TO negotiate higher pay. As it is right now, the very cheapness of backfilling with newbies is keeping the company from having to address attrition.
Not hard. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3504691)
And I’m saying, sure - bring first year pay up ti $150 an hour with a 75 MMG and full insurance from day one of intro if they want to raise first year pay. It’ll make backfilling attrition four times as expensive as it is for management now. Make current levels of attrition unaffordable for management. Then they’ll HAVE TO negotiate higher pay. As it is right now, the very cheapness of backfilling with newbies is keeping the company from having to address attrition.
Not hard. So would you agree to fix only 1st year pay and training pay and leave the rest of the rates alone? |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3504741)
Answer the question. How long does your tactic have to not work before you become convinced it won’t work?
Because you’ve been singing that same song for over four years and it ain’t worked yet. But I do appreciate your piety. 😉 Management wants to only fix 1st year pay. Which is what you say will fix the pilots problems. So you think management is setting their own trap and just don't know it? |
Originally Posted by Alpiner
(Post 3504864)
Probably not the best strategy considering this is the point in which NK pilots have the most leverage.
The people they are losing - junior CAs who will spend a long time on reserve and FOs are easily replaced as long as new hire classes remain full, replaced by FOs costing them about $50 K that first year and by upgrading FOs with less longevity than those CAs departing. It’s a net decrease in payroll for management. And management gets to keep the unvested parts of the 401k of those departing. Management is coming out ahead on the deal. Where is the ‘leverage’ in that? Cinquo and a few others have been advocating this “strategy” for four plus years, and it hasn’t worked yet. It is the equivalent of bringing in cheap labor to replace the people quitting, negating the leverage of attrition. Why would management raise everyone’s wages to avoid doing that? What other airlines are successfully implementing this policy? Or have implemented this policy? Where has it ever worked? How long will it have to not work before you’ll be convinced it isn’t going to work? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:07 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands