Hopefully he/she gets picked up by AA and becomes their problem. Being salty and negative is a basic requirement over there.

You haters are loud, and I think I might agree with most of you. But consider this--You want to vote no because of how it's not good enough for you. Maybe you should vote yes because you see how this deal won't help the company solve attrition, will get you paid, and that we will be back at the table next year. If you believe this is just the beginning of the pilot shortage then voting yes will get you paid and not solve attrition. Then the next time at the table we have more leverage and we got paid.
​​​​​
​​​​​​

Except this could end backfiring and help the company by giving up any leverage we have. No one here would be "hurting" themselves. We all have liveable wages. What's actually going to hurt the company is not taking the lowest deal we get. They have an attrition problem today and can't keep classes filled today. A cheap buy out is what the company wants. Fight for a big payout now while we can rather then settling.

What percent of your class has already left for better opportunity and a brighter future though?

as a 10yr CA here I’d take this T/A over AA anyday, lol. This T/A is incredibly underwhelming but there does seem to be more of an emotional reaction to it than a logical one. What’s kind of funny is if mgmt would have just agreed to this a month or two earlier, it easily passes, lol, not sure if it passes now. Either way, Funny to see everyone angry at $318/hr (Slope is still not fixed) for top of scale in Jan ‘24 with Red/Green intact while our company is hemorrhaging cash (no fault of our own) Shows how far this industry has come from a few years ago.

the best part is the guys yelling on the Chats not to include the 321 override because they “hardly fly it and don’t get it…

That’s what makes this so funny, the hysteria. Sprinkle in the ineptness of someone thinking the 321 rate is only paid if you fly the 321, well that sounds just like the Spirit I know.

This was the risk of a compensation only deal, it forces people to only look at compensation as a comparison vs the entire contract. This passes because in the end I know the majority of people like to complain but still vote to take the easy cash, we have demonstrated that before.

And I thought it was going to the massive influx of low time regional pilots and cfis that would take the easy payout bait.

But this offer does frickall to help the company's problem. I have a friend with a class date hoping that he timed it right with the TA. With the news he's ****ed that the company doubled down on no bennies and no pay day 1. Sees the 2500 and no bennies as an insult to anyone on the outside. Where's the backfire? When the B6 deal fails? When B6 deal stalls? Both put us back at the table AND the company is still hemorrhaging FOs. While our deal isn't the best, the company really did a bangup job on their side. Maybe this is best case. I get paid and you miserable f[friend]s still leave to the legacies and I move up every month.

As I said earlier, I really admired you guys when you were walking your picket with signs saying Discount Fares, not Discount Pilots. But with all the yes voters coming out of the woodwork, this oldie is for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qben5MLmtXo

My guess is the company's banking on a recession slowing hiring and there need to come back to the table to give us anything extra. Have you considered the idea that maybe the reason some of us want a better contract and are fighting so hard for a better ta is because we want a reason to stay here? Not everyone wants legacy rates because that's where they want to be. Some want it because they plan on having a long career here and want to get the most out of it I'm not sure how this concept is so hard for people here to grasp.

Hope we can kill the “we don’t deserve it” attitude before JCBA.

JB has been successful in moving into the pay scales(including slope) and retirement of United, Delta, AA over the last two cycles. I expect nothing less in the next two weeks when we agree on our own extension.

Good luck with your vote.

The company has shown that they have no desire to move training pay up or pay bennies day 1. If we vote no or yes FOs still leave. So if we vote no this drags out for 6 more months, I lose out on $25k to gain $10/hr which will take another year to make up the difference and we'll be back at the table anyway. I wish it were higher too but because the training pay is still bad I'm leaning yes.

Exactly. Take the cash, let them hang themselves, and when they want to change pay again to help attrition (outside of moving 1st year pay to almost 2nd), we can discuss a mutual interest LOA.

Management “placed their order” to feed everyone but sadly they didn’t buy enough food. That’s fine, the store will still be open next year, just it will be more expensive.

The only people losing out on 25k in 6 months are first year fo's that would be moving to the new 2nd year pay scale and even that's a stretch. I don't think any other scale Is taking that big of an increase. I also don't see this dragging out as the company needs this deal more than we do. They said In the beginning they want a deal by March. For most captains to make up the difference in pay it's equal to picking up a two day or a few turns and for fo's it's even easier with 200% being handed out like candy.

What you seem to be forgetting is that the ULCC model is the most resilient and best positioned to withstand an economic downturn…

It’s $21k for me over the next 6 months. Now, please direct me to where these $21,000 for a “picking up a 2 day or a few turns” are at.

$21,000 is worth about 14-15 hours CA pay a month at current rates, over 6 months. So that’s a 3 day extra each month a CA has to work to make up that cost. Or 3 day trips to make up that each month.

This is not a small drop in the bucket. The math says otherwise.

People also want to say all the legacy carriers are equal. Look at the financials of delta VS American and they are in significantly different places but AA will always pay close to delta rates to stay competitive. It has nothing to do with the type of carrier and everything to do with the mentality of the pilot group.

Company is at the table now. Don’t let them leave. Make a better deal.

maybe rate wise but DELTA’s work rules are superior to AA’s

Maybe i wrote it poorly or you misread. But that's exactly what I meant it equals out to picking up a few days a month on either side. It's a small sacrifice for bigger gains and to set ourselves up better in the future. I also never said it was a small drop in the bucket I simply said there were ways to make up the difference over a short period of time.

Agreed but that's not the argument people are making they are say we aren't delta so we don't get delta rates(not saying we should get delta rates). My assumption would be they are making this point based on the product that delta offers and the model they operate under. I was just pointing out AA operates the same model and does significantly worse and yet can still pay there pilots similar rates.

gotcha………….

Building our legacy*


*starting 1/1/24
Lol! Nope!

Yep. Absolutely pathetic.

F: Line Adjustment
• Pilots may step trade between 60 Credit hours to Monthly maximum plus five in first step only.
• Codified Crew Planning will assign trips as able after Second Step Bid if the Pilot is below 70 Credit hours.
• Codified the “Third Step Bid” process of 48 hours duration at the completion of second step bidding for BBHs to pick up, drop or trade with open flying time trips.


For those wanting a few extra bucks for Alaska rates, maybe keep in mind a contract is more than rates. Anyone here willing to let scheduling give you trips if below 70 hours of credit for the month? Anyone? You get a few more dollars? We want Alaska rates, right? So we get some of the rules too

So who is willing to take this provision for an extra $5 an hour?

I'm confused are we negations rates atm or rules as well? Seems it's a no concessions rate deal we're in not a full contract.

If we sold off the grid and drop to zero they’d probably give us Alaska +20. It’s a huge cost to them

If we are comparing what we were offered for rates vs what Alaska was offered (and accepted) after years at the table, you have to take into consideration what they did/game/took to get there. You can’t take rates as apples to apples when they lack work rules in other areas.

All costs are relevant in a CBA. Imagine how much they would pay us if we allowed them to work us minimum of 70 hours each month, no drops below. Their staffing problems would be fixed, probably need less pilots going forward.

Rates can’t be viewed in a vacuum.

Actaully when the company and the NC agree that this just a rates negotiation I they can be. Which is what makes this such a unique situation.

That Alaska bidding language more than likely goes away (or is modified by a pbs loa) when pbs is turned on. It shouldn’t be a multi step bidding process anymore. I’ll guess that’s transition language.

One way or another, the NK pilot group will be back at the negotiating table in 18-24 months. A 3 month delay would make sense if there were a realistic prospect of recouping in the remaining 15-21 months what was lost by not accepting the first deal, but the longer this drags out the bigger the eventual gain must be in the remaining time to justify it. And the fact that it is only a two year deal means you have to look at it differently as well.

The company recently took out a $600 million loan,

https://industry-update.com/spirit-a...w-debt/186114/

and this deal will absorb about 80% (considering finance charges) of that. MIGHT we get more of that $600 million if we turn this down? Maybe, but who knows? More than that? Not without a delay for management to come up with a new loan, because the money ain’t there until we start making a profit. And how long might that take? The only SURE things are this deal and a replay in 2 years or less in whatever the economic and pilot shortage situation exists at the time.

The only reason JB has come up to legacy is because none of them have had a pay raise in 4 years. Wake up.

Would Alaska have taken our rates with our QOL flexibility? Honest question because I have no clue. But the comparable peer floor might be slightly different if you compare apples to apples.

tell that to the Spirit pilots that were furloughed in ‘08…

I often jumpseat on Alaska. Most of the guys/gals I talk to think that the money will help their attrition only somewhat because their QOL has so little flexibility. Like at NK, the senior people will stick around because it’s too painful to start over, but they expect to continue to bleed FOs because of their work rules. Well, that and a semi-toxic relationship with management.

Here’s a short video of the Alaska COO giving the pilot picket line the hairy eyeball:

https://youtu.be/irXxA9RQyCo

Here’s my answer when people talk about if it’s worth giving up some pay for the infamous NK QOL.

Go look at Delta rates, check out their 330/777/350 widebody rates. Then subtract their narrow body rates, and multiply that difference by yearly credit rates.

See we will never get widebodies at Spirit (despite well over a decade of rumors). We probably won’t at JetBlue, and even those B6 pilots who firmly believe they will have to admit it wouldn’t happen until post merger and extremely capital intensive to get any fleet to an appreciable scale…. Ten years from now at best.

So that’s the price we pay here at Spirit for our infamous QOL, the opportunity cost of the widebody pay we will never see.

I’m fine with not making what a 350 captain makes. I’m fine with not having the sophisticated product other carriers tout. I’m fine with the comments people make when they learn what company I fly for. I’m fine with always being on ghetto end of every terminal. With all that in mind, there is an updated market cost for what it costs to crew a narrowbody N-registered jet, and no one here can sell me on the idea that any QOL should make me feel comfortable accepting less than that market rate.

https://i.ibb.co/9HcP8FJ/916-AB3-FA-...91-EADCE87.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/N3g0CDs/EE0-E43-B7-...4-E767-A27.jpg

Another consideration
 

Should be a "no" vote unless snap up provision to JBLU rates is included should they get new/higher rates before the acquisition. The pilot group with the higher rates will have more leverage for the seniority integration method used when the arbitrators collaborate to come up with a fair and equitable merged seniority list.

Then let Spirit come up to legacy rates too. After all, the legacies haven't had a pay raise in 4 years.

And you can damn well bet B6 stood up in cold ass NY on the streets and demanded it for most of that journey to legacy rates. You get what you want when you demand it, not settle for what the company is willing to offer. Go to sleep.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk