Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Spirit (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/spirit/)
-   -   First Week Openers (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/spirit/139279-first-week-openers.html)

CLE to IAH 10-01-2022 09:44 AM


Originally Posted by Bluedriver (Post 3504888)
Management is coming to the table, which is an acknowledgement that they don't desire the current attrition level.

So would you agree to fix only 1st year pay and training pay and leave the rest of the rates alone?


Yes. Yes he would.

CLE to IAH 10-01-2022 09:46 AM


Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3504933)
Haha. Exactly. Cargo has it all figured out.

And to CargoDog, yes the plan is working. 4 years ago we didn’t have the attrition because guys like you were still trying to come over here and fly the Airbus for $50/hr

Thankfully the ExCargoDogs willing to work for $50/hr are drying up. And because we didn’t raise first year pay 4 years ago, attrition is the reason and only reason why management is at the table.

Thankfully the number of guys like you, wanting to work for so cheap, is ending, and rates will have to come up.


nothing else needs to be said.


parking checklist plz.

Bluedriver 10-01-2022 10:47 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3504973)
NK has increased their flying more than the legacy airlines have and the legacies aren’t losing pilots to NK much. What you are touting as evidence of success are general issues throughout the industry. Everybody has training constraints, but not everybody has created their own “B” scale by allowing management to onboard labor at a huge discount to industry standard. The only way that attrition can be stopped is higher pay for those not attriting. Triple newbie pay and the cost of attrition will triple. That’ll get managements attention.

Answer the question. How is using MANAGEMENT's preferred solution (just raising 1st year pay) going to put management in a box and give the rest of the pilots more leverage?

ShortBusRider 10-01-2022 11:14 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3504966)
The leverage IS attrition, but what demographic is doing the attrition.

The attrition in the senior CA group is negligible. Management knows these guys aren’t going to go over to a legacy and restart at the bottom for 92 an hour on reserve. The attrition that counts is FOs and to a lesser extent junior CAs. And with legacies hiring, these people are leaving, but as long as management can replace them with cheap help, they don’t care. They have no real incentive to raise pay generally. Not when they can replace those leaving at $50 k a year.

They’ll be quite happy to never raise CA pay and backfill their FO losses with guys who work for $50k a year. It’s like a “B” scale. It allows current FO jobs to be replaced by more and more less experienced people. And those people will keep coming as the regional model cracks and breaks, because a type rating in a full sized airliner eventually gives them a step up the ladder to someplace else. And as long as management can replace them with another $50k guy, that’s fine with management.

And it’s been four plus years that Cinquo (and a few others) have been saying that screwing over the newbies was giving us leverage and nothing has changed yet.

As much as we all know cinco is a 42 year old virgin that tucks his shirt into his underwear, he’s not arguing against raising 1st year pay. Remembering that when the current contract was signed, it was a different era, and 1st year pay being low wasn’t uncommon. Even then, from what I understand, no one was happy about the 1st year pay. If the company wanted to pay 1st year a normal pay rate, they had the opportunity during the last negotiations. As a pilot group, we shouldn’t let the company off the hook by allowing just 1 pay rate increase. The entire pay scale needs to be competitive.

CincoDeMayo 10-01-2022 11:44 AM


Originally Posted by ShortBusRider (Post 3505028)
As much as we all know cinco is a 42 year old virgin that tucks his shirt into his underwear, he’s not arguing against raising 1st year pay. Remembering that when the current contract was signed, it was a different era, and 1st year pay being low wasn’t uncommon. Even then, from what I understand, no one was happy about the 1st year pay. If the company wanted to pay 1st year a normal pay rate, they had the opportunity during the last negotiations. As a pilot group, we shouldn’t let the company off the hook by allowing just 1 pay rate increase. The entire pay scale needs to be competitive.

Have you tried tucking your shirt into your underwear? Amazing.

But even a short bus rider like yourself sees how simple this is.

Excargodog 10-01-2022 01:34 PM


Originally Posted by ShortBusRider (Post 3505028)
As much as we all know cinco is a 42 year old virgin that tucks his shirt into his underwear, he’s not arguing against raising 1st year pay. Remembering that when the current contract was signed, it was a different era, and 1st year pay being low wasn’t uncommon. Even then, from what I understand, no one was happy about the 1st year pay. If the company wanted to pay 1st year a normal pay rate, they had the opportunity during the last negotiations. As a pilot group, we shouldn’t let the company off the hook by allowing just 1 pay rate increase. The entire pay scale needs to be competitive.

Au contraire. Cinco has spent the last four years arguing with me about raising first year pay. From the very beginning he wanted to hold them hostage - long before negotiations had even opened for this contract. He said on numerous occasions it was a zero sum game and the union had no responsibilities for people not yet in property. I disagree. The union has a responsibility to treat fairly with everybody covered by the contract.

CincoDeMayo 10-01-2022 01:50 PM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505090)
Au contraire. Cinco has spent the last four years arguing with me about raising first year pay. From the very beginning he wanted to hold them hostage - long before negotiations had even opened for this contract. He said on numerous occasions it was a zero sum game and the union had no responsibilities for people not yet in property. I disagree. The union has a responsibility to treat fairly with everybody covered by the contract.

Yup. You got me. 🙄

I’ve always said and will continue to say that any pay increases for the pilots will be done for every pilot. And that low first year pay needed to be corrected in the next CBA along with all pilot pay.

Revisionist history for you. You make up what’s been said in the past and I have said over and over the same thing.

In the end, the very pay you complain about is the exact pay you applied to and learned your Airbus flows for.

Thankfully our NC didn’t allow the ridiculous provision frontier has to raise first year pay, unilaterally, just below second year pay

Pay for all or pay for none. That’s always been my stance.


That first year pay being low is a recruitment problem and it’s not the unions responsibility to go to the company to raise these rates without raises for everyone. 99% of the pilot agree with this. You’re dense as the day is long, and will never get it. But that’s fine. Keep “first yerrrr pay” yourself. Luckily the NC is doing what we all know is the correct path to a contract

BlueDriver is still waiting for his answer, by the way.

But that’s fine. I’m done with you on this. You’ve been proven wrong, time and time again by many on here.

As CLE to IAH said “parking checklist complete”

ShortBusRider 10-01-2022 02:07 PM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505090)
Au contraire. Cinco has spent the last four years arguing with me about raising first year pay. From the very beginning he wanted to hold them hostage - long before negotiations had even opened for this contract. He said on numerous occasions it was a zero sum game and the union had no responsibilities for people not yet in property. I disagree. The union has a responsibility to treat fairly with everybody covered by the contract.

The current low rate is what can be used to leverage higher rates for everyone, including 1st year rates most likely to a much higher percentage. Everyone thinks and knows, 1st year pay has to come up, but so does the rest of the scale. It’s the 1st year pay that’s gonna force a quicker resolution for all pay. I mean, could you imagine us settling for a 1st year raise, then it taking another 3+ years to settle the rest of the scale? It wouldn’t really feel like a win. And we’d have screwed ourselves.

Excargodog 10-01-2022 04:07 PM


Originally Posted by ShortBusRider (Post 3505102)
The current low rate is what can be used to leverage higher rates for everyone, including 1st year rates most likely to a much higher percentage. Everyone thinks and knows, 1st year pay has to come up, but so does the rest of the scale. It’s the 1st year pay that’s gonna force a quicker resolution for all pay. I mean, could you imagine us settling for a 1st year raise, then it taking another 3+ years to settle the rest of the scale? It wouldn’t really feel like a win. And we’d have screwed ourselves.

It’s attrition that will force management to the table. As long as they have cheap labor coming in the bottom, they’ll take all of that they can get. And the attrition doesn’t depend upon shafting the newbies. Alaska has an attrition problem and they aren’t shafting the newbies. But attrition drove their management to the table with an offer. Is that the best possible offer? Probably not, but it’s a lot more money than NK pilots are currently making.JetBlue has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies. Even Frontier has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies any more.

But as long as NK can manage to grow by just hiring more newbies on the cheap, why should they worry much about attrition? Until it’s more costly to replace the people they are losing than it is to pay people to stay, they can afford to stonewall.

I’m not against all rates coming up, that ought to be the goal, but other pilot groups have higher rates than NK without screwing over their newbies. And as I said, give me one example of a major airline where the “we get leverage by screwing over the newbies” model has actually worked. Give me an example, not a hypothetical or wishful thinking, but an example.

ShortBusRider 10-01-2022 04:37 PM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505144)
It’s attrition that will force management to the table. As long as they have cheap labor coming in the bottom, they’ll take all of that they can get. And the attrition doesn’t depend upon shafting the newbies. Alaska has an attrition problem and they aren’t shafting the newbies. But attrition drove their management to the table with an offer. Is that the best possible offer? Probably not, but it’s a lot more money than NK pilots are currently making.JetBlue has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies. Even Frontier has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies any more.

But as long as NK can manage to grow by just hiring more newbies on the cheap, why should they worry much about attrition? Until it’s more costly to replace the people they are losing than it is to pay people to stay, they can afford to stonewall.

I’m not against all rates coming up, that ought to be the goal, but other pilot groups have higher rates than NK without screwing over their newbies. And as I said, give me one example of a major airline where the “we get leverage by screwing over the newbies” model has actually worked. Give me an example, not a hypothetical or wishful thinking, but an example.

Everyone wants training and year 1 pay to go up. The difference is a matter of going about doing it. All these companies who raised year 1 rates, it came with a new contract raising everyone’s rates, excluding frontier (?) I think. But no one’s screwing anyone over. We all had the opportunity to go elsewhere, but we chose to come here even with the lower pay.

Bluedriver 10-01-2022 04:49 PM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505144)
It’s attrition that will force management to the table. As long as they have cheap labor coming in the bottom, they’ll take all of that they can get. And the attrition doesn’t depend upon shafting the newbies. Alaska has an attrition problem and they aren’t shafting the newbies. But attrition drove their management to the table with an offer. Is that the best possible offer? Probably not, but it’s a lot more money than NK pilots are currently making.JetBlue has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies. Even Frontier has an attrition problem, without screwing over their newbies any more.

But as long as NK can manage to grow by just hiring more newbies on the cheap, why should they worry much about attrition? Until it’s more costly to replace the people they are losing than it is to pay people to stay, they can afford to stonewall.

I’m not against all rates coming up, that ought to be the goal, but other pilot groups have higher rates than NK without screwing over their newbies. And as I said, give me one example of a major airline where the “we get leverage by screwing over the newbies” model has actually worked. Give me an example, not a hypothetical or wishful thinking, but an example.

So right now, management can just hire newbies on the cheap and solve their problem... Easy. Except management wants to raise 1st year pay, just 1st year pay. So clearly having a low 1st year pay rate doesn't solve management's problems???

Your logic fails the basic test.

Justabusdriver1 10-01-2022 05:31 PM

I’m losing money coming to spirit at this point. Coming for better qol and bases. But I have the expectation rates will go up to match and out pace regionals. The number of regional fos leaving to join spirit is going to dry up quick if something isn’t done

JulesWinfield 10-01-2022 05:38 PM


Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3505171)
I’m losing money coming to spirit at this point. Coming for better qol and bases. But I have the expectation rates will go up to match and out pace regionals. The number of regional fos leaving to join spirit is going to dry up quick if something isn’t done

Not sure there’s much the company can do. If junior captains are leaving, it likely isn’t because of pay. It’s more likely due to base reductions, quality of life degradation, and single fleet type stagnation. First year pay is criminal, but bumping it to six figures won’t stop the bleeding.

SoFloFlyer 10-01-2022 06:15 PM


Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3505171)
I’m losing money coming to spirit at this point. Coming for better qol and bases. But I have the expectation rates will go up to match and out pace regionals. The number of regional fos leaving to join spirit is going to dry up quick if something isn’t done

If you’re at a regional, it’s a pay cut your first year. You’ll break even in year 2. 3 and above (especially if you upgrade) you’ll make more than you could ever hope for at a regional.

I never understood this logic as people only have to worry about year 1 for….. 1 year lol

Excargodog 10-01-2022 06:34 PM


Originally Posted by JulesWinfield (Post 3505176)
Not sure there’s much the company can do. If junior captains are leaving, it likely isn’t because of pay. It’s more likely due to base reductions, quality of life degradation, and single fleet type stagnation. First year pay is criminal, but bumping it to six figures won’t stop the bleeding.

Which is the point. It’s attrition that’s the issue, and cheap new hires simply facilitate management to offset the attrition. Screwing newbies doesn’t gain us leverage, it loses us leverage.

Justabusdriver1 10-01-2022 06:39 PM


Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer (Post 3505191)
If you’re at a regional, it’s a pay cut your first year. You’ll break even in year 2. 3 and above (especially if you upgrade) you’ll make more than you could ever hope for at a regional.

I never understood this logic as people only have to worry about year 1 for….. 1 year lol

Not quite. Break even point now is somewhere in the third year. Yeah you’re making more second year but you’re still playing catch up. Not to mention like others said 2-3 months of training pay isn’t even enough to live off of these days. Contract day one with reduced guaranteed hours would make more sense.

My point was the constant influx of regional pilots is going to slow as many who would have considered coming to a lcc like spirit are going to stay at their current position till they can go direct to mainline. Attrition might be the problem but there’s going to be huge problems on both ends. They’re going to lose that “cheap labor” source if they don’t at least match their pay or come close to it to keep people walking in the door.

Excargodog 10-01-2022 06:44 PM


Originally Posted by Bluedriver (Post 3505159)
So right now, management can just hire newbies on the cheap and solve their problem... Easy. Except management wants to raise 1st year pay, just 1st year pay. So clearly having a low 1st year pay rate doesn't solve management's problems???

Your logic fails the basic test.

Unless NK management is smarter than you are. But tell me Bluedriver, if screwing new hires is a good idea, why do no other majors do it? Why does JetBlue pay their New hires $94 with a 75 hr Reserve guarantee?

And I don’t see paying a decent wage to new hires stopping B6 attrition much. You guys are losing FOs to the legacies too I hear when I JS with you. Junior CAs not so much. Why do you think you can pay your FOs a decent wage but it would somehow devastate NK? Same for Alaska and WN?

Your logic fails the basic test.

Excargodog 10-01-2022 06:52 PM


Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer (Post 3505191)
If you’re at a regional, it’s a pay cut your first year. You’ll break even in year 2. 3 and above (especially if you upgrade) you’ll make more than you could ever hope for at a regional.

I never understood this logic as people only have to worry about year 1 for….. 1 year lol

The reason for the attrition isn’t the year one pay, it’s the subsequent pay that costs junior CAs and more senior FOs. And paying newbies a reasonable wage won’t stop that attrition. It just makes it more costly for management to fail to address it. That’s more leverage than simply screwing over newbies for the sake of tradition.

And yeah, it’s only one year, but you can say the same thing for EVERY year up until year 12. Why not screw over year six guys, if it’s only one year? That logic makes just as much sense as yours.

As for year three upgrades, you seriously think that will survive the SLI?

CLE to IAH 10-01-2022 07:02 PM

Finally after all this time on APC I figured out how to do this


learning has occurred!


Excargodog 10-01-2022 07:06 PM


Originally Posted by CLE to IAH (Post 3505209)
Finally after all this time on APC I figured out how to do this


learning has occurred!

Hey I recommended those who didn’t like my postings do this months ago. Glad you finally learned how.

Of course, you’ll never read this now…🤣

gripngrab 10-02-2022 03:33 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505197)
Which is the point. It’s attrition that’s the ie, and cheap new hires simply facilitate management to offset the attrition. Screwing newbies doesn’t gain us leverage, it loses us leverage.

You're pretty dumb you know. This is basic common sense. Spirit management needs new hires and beyond to stay, especially year one new hires. Contract doesn't allow Spirit management to throw money at that SPECIFIC area. Thus, Spirit pilots hold all the cards on this one. It's called leverage. Give the company an LOA to raise first year pay only and address the issue, contract negotiations stall.
Sure, I would like new hires to be compensated properly. But Spirit management didn't see it that way in 2018. That's their cake and now they have to eat it. Unfortunately with all the new hires that still want to come here as well. The answer is that the new hires will stop coming here with more options now thus increasing the NK pilots leverage.

Justabusdriver1 10-02-2022 04:14 AM

Saying attrition is the only problem lacks foresight. People have had class dates for weeks. The real effect of regional contracts likely won’t become apparent for a couple months as class sizes and applications drop out. I’m definitely for an all around raise to the entire pilot group but imo the gap between first and second year doesn’t need to be so big. Do something to keep spirit attractive so people will still come in from regionals and address the pay gap between colleagues at other airlines. Doesn’t necessarily have to be higher but enough to make people think twice before readily jumping ship.

Bluedriver 10-02-2022 05:03 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505197)
Which is the point. It’s attrition that’s the issue, and cheap new hires simply facilitate management to offset the attrition. Screwing newbies doesn’t gain us leverage, it loses us leverage.

Raising 1st year pay gives leverage to the pilots???

Then why does your management only want to raise 1st year pay???

Bluedriver 10-02-2022 05:05 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505206)
The reason for the attrition isn’t the year one pay, it’s the subsequent pay that costs junior CAs and more senior FOs. And paying newbies a reasonable wage won’t stop that attrition. It just makes it more costly for management to fail to address it. That’s more leverage than simply screwing over newbies for the sake of tradition.

And yeah, it’s only one year, but you can say the same thing for EVERY year up until year 12. Why not screw over year six guys, if it’s only one year? That logic makes just as much sense as yours.

As for year three upgrades, you seriously think that will survive the SLI?

JB upgrades are just as short as NK, if not shorter.

Bluedriver 10-02-2022 05:10 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505202)
Unless NK management is smarter than you are. But tell me Bluedriver, if screwing new hires is a good idea, why do no other majors do it? Why does JetBlue pay their New hires $94 with a 75 hr Reserve guarantee?

And I don’t see paying a decent wage to new hires stopping B6 attrition much. You guys are losing FOs to the legacies too I hear when I JS with you. Junior CAs not so much. Why do you think you can pay your FOs a decent wage but it would somehow devastate NK? Same for Alaska and WN?

Your logic fails the basic test.

You are putting lots of BS words in my mouth.

I have NO desire to screw new hires or keep their pay low beyond the next LOA/CBA, but that next LOA/CBA needs to raise ALL NK/JB pilots to or above market rates.

Also never said it would harm NK to raise 1st year rates. You are making crap up because your argument is failing.

You say raising 1st year pay will give the leverage to the pilots, yet your management wants to raise 1st year pay and only 1st year pay. Do they somehow not know that doing so will give the leverage to the pilots? Or is EVERYONE else right and raising only 1st year pay will take the pressure off management to raise all years rates???

Let's see, on one side is you and your management, and on the other side is everyone else and your union...

Not hard.

ShortBusRider 10-02-2022 05:28 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505197)
Which is the point. It’s attrition that’s the issue, and cheap new hires simply facilitate management to offset the attrition. Screwing newbies doesn’t gain us leverage, it loses us leverage.

I still don’t understand how anyone is getting screwed over. Did the company not tell you what they were paying new hires when you signed up? There were plenty of other places to go besides NK.

dualinput 10-02-2022 05:48 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3505197)
Which is the point. It’s attrition that’s the issue, and cheap new hires simply facilitate management to offset the attrition. Screwing newbies doesn’t gain us leverage, it loses us leverage.

They don’t need attrition to stop. Yes you are right that SOME attrition replaced w lower cost first year does help them.

What you’re missing is we are losing a ton of first year replaced w first year which costs money. That cost isn’t even really the problem. The problem is they have so much attrition they cannot fly the fleet at the utilization the ULCC model requires to make money.

They don’t need attrition to stop. They in fact do enjoy some level of attrition to lower costs. They just need attrition to slow enough so that they can staff the fleet to fly a profitable higher utilization. Until that happens spirit will not make money. How can they slow attrition enough to staff the fleet that grows everyday yet still enjoy some of the cost savings from light attrition? Raise only first year pay and stall out everyone else until a JCBA and let JetBlue handle it.

Training capacity is maxed and they cannot staff the fleet that keeps getting deliveries. SLOWING not ending attrition is their best case cost wise and their goal. That is why only raising first year is what they want. That’s why frontier did it and why they won’t see a contract for years.

You need to understand we all wanted first year to be much higher last time around and spirit was dead against it because they could always upguage training capacity if needed and lower experience requirements. Covid hit and they pushed back the deliveries. Now present day they have experience about as low as they can take it any training capacity is maxed out. The last 4 years low first year pay did not do much for the pilot group and hurt first year guys. Today that is completely different and the ONLY reason spirit is at the table. Your drum beating had some merit a couple years ago but today you’re missing the big picture completely. I suggest you get a clue.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:38 PM.


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