B767 300 pay
 

I remember hearing we didn't get wide body pay ONLY because the 767 300 was supposed to go away in the original merged contract.

Some questions.........

1. Once we found out in the contract extension that the 767 300 didn't go away why didn't we fix the rate to a wide body rate?

2. I understand we are in the process of getting some Hawiian Airlines 300's. Doesn't that indicate the airplane isn't going away in any sort of immediate time-frame?

3. The 767 300 is a wide body. It weighs 410K pounds at take off and ATC calls it a heavy. How exactly did this get screwed up? Wasn't it fairly obvious the aircraft should pay wide body pay?

4. It flies 10 to 11 hour routine flights from USA to Europe, to Hawaii, and to deep South America. Sort of what the 777 does, and the 787 does. Only difference is 767 300 pilots don't have a fancy bunk. That alone should get them more pay....(ha).

5. The load of the 767 300 and the 787 is fairly similar. Again, I don't get it. Same mission, same load capacity..... Relief pilots, the whole shmear. What's up Negotiating Committee?

6. Where are we at in this contract as it relates to 767 300 pay?

One legacy demanded the pay rates in such a way to support an SLI argument. That answers most of those questions.

Not really. It's what the airplane does. It's the mission. It's our current situation.

The 767 300 has always been a widebody. Seems it was on Legacy UAL property a long time before the merger was ever considered or announced. It's always been a wide body since the early 1980's when the jet was conceived.

I actually heard that very issue is getting fixed! By bringing the 767-400 rates down to non WB. Oh wait, that’s not a fix.:rolleyes: That will create movement if that were to happen. :cool:

That may or may not be true, but I think AA and DL have the 767-300 in pretty much the same pay category we do. Not saying it's correct, just pointing it out.

the 757 and 767 were the same group at LUAL.

Every aircraft type had different pay rates (the 747-400 being the highest) except the 757/767 and guppies. 319/320 had same rate, so did the 737-300/500s. The 737-200 was the lowest when I got here.

I heard the “it’s going away argument”directly from a negotiator at a road show. What ever the reason we had a chance to fix it and it wasn’t fixed. I have also heard the “that’s how delta pays it” argument from line pukes.

Off to nap for my 9+ hour flight carrying 200+ pax for narrowbody pay.

I have to ask, how do DAL and AA compare on the 767-300 to our rates. I don’t know but suspect there’s a similarity.

Lee

Or:

One legacy carrier paid it at the proper widebody rate pre-merger while the other did not. I'll let you fill in the blanks with that but as a hint, the proper paying carrier started with a "C" and ended with a "AL".

China airlines?

Yes our pay matches Dal/Aa in the 767-300.

I would like to know the history of it for history's sake.

BUT, here's the FRIGGIN DEAL!

It's a damn Widebody, doing a widebody mission!


Pay it at a wide body rate. So is the 400.

It's really pretty damn simple.

Almost Exactly. It’s just as egregious at DAL and AMR(14%difference) as here. 6 seat difference between the 767-300 and 787-800 or a 2.7% difference in passengers carried for a a 20% difference in pay.

And don’t anyone go spouting off how much faster the 787-800 is or some decision 83 nonsense, the 78 is about 4% faster at max speed.

Anyway you cut it the 767-300 should pay much more compared to 757 or 737-800 than it does now, which is about 3.6%.

Historical perspective is good, but who gives a ***k about placing blame at this point? Water under the bridge, how about spending energy to fix it instead?

Close but no cigar. :D

Agree completely but I wasn't the one who put up the first erroneous post. Was attempting to correct O2's attempt at rewriting history.

Longevity pay. Done. Bid what you want, egos be damned.

Thanks, should have put my millennial skills to use to make multiple quotes. Not beat down by years of this yet, but still trying to look ahead knowing there will be a storm or 3 by the time I get to the end. Make hay while the sun shines and all that.

And one negotiator at that airline INSISTED on paying the way it is today.
He was very proud of it too. Initials J.B.

JB was not a negotiator but a Rep, but he did dig in like a pestulant child

Are you sure you didn't mean JP as in the former CAL MEC Chairman?

When you say "wide body rate" do you mean it should pay as much as the A380, or 747?

Honest Question.

Is longevity pay more or less expensive to the company? Taking into consideration less training it might be a wash.

Variable, like everything else. UAL 5 years ago . . . 95% 12 years longevity so everyone reaches max pay. UAL in 5 years . . . half at 12 years.

Management today just wants costs they can account for in a 5 year plan, and they want a product that is superiour to other carriers. We are in an incredible moment for our careers. We are NOT the target. In fact, we are part of the solution.

As an earlier younger and wise poster said: Make hay while the sun shines. :D

My bad....
But I agree with your statement...

No, JB...
Although JP was pretty bad as well.

The A380 is going away...

Well we don't have either the 380 or the 747 on property....

But, the 777, 767-400, and 787 all seem to pay the same per hour, NO?...….

Longevity Pay.... Dump Weight Pay.
Everyone is a line holder....no reserve.
5 hours a day minimum pay for everything...
Company pays maximum IRS limit retirement from first year.
Contract is a maximum 12 pages...ditch attorneys...company pays for the grievance committee.

I retire in less than 5 years. Someone needs to step up and make the changes, 23% of us won't be here in 2024.

Fly Safe

Every extra line in the contract makes us more money.

But those rates are in the contract.

How can you say an AC that comes in at less than half the weight of the 747 that we had when contract was signed should pay the same?


767-400 paid the same as a 747 and 777, ridiculous.

not all wide bodies are equal, and the same is true for narrow bodies. Are you fighting for those too to all pay the same rate?

the 757 pays the same as a guppy and what a C100?

it is in the contract, and a "wide body."

Speaking of wide bodies

And back to the truth of the matter...This is undeniably correct!

JB/JP represented that legacy that started with C and wasn’t China Airlines.

Our pay banding the way it is currently constructed is asinine. The 767-400 should not pay what a 777 pays (definitely not the 747). I think airplanes should be tiered this way.

1. 777-300 (747-8 should also be included)
2. 777-200, 787-10 & -9, and 767-400
3. 767-300, 787-8
4. 757, Guppy Maximus -10
5. Fifi, Guppy

Just my $0.02

Congrats, you just gave 95% of the pilots here a pay cut. Keep you two cents to yourself.

I’m glad to see mostly people see how dumb it is that the 767-400 is banded at the highest pay band.

I don’t see the issue in “bringing down the 767-400” as long as it “brings up” the rate for the 757 and 767-300. If we have 5x as many 757/767-300 as we do 767-400, then I would be happy bringing up the 757/767 rate $1 for every $5 we bring down the 767-400 until the pay rates converge. Overall pilot compensation stays the same. That’s what we care about.

Keep paybanding simple.

737 and Airbus 320 series
757 and 767
777 and 787

Less time pilots have to spend in training. Less money the company has to spend on training. More profit for our profit sharing checks. More profit that gives us leverage for a stronger contract overall.

So you want to bring DOWN a pay rate? Seriously?

He only talks about bands, not a word is said about rates.

Are the 767-300 and 767-400 in the same bid category or are they separate?