I just don’t believe it’s a money issue, yes I want delta rates and then some but I think to truest solve captain staffing you need better qol options. Look at for instance delta reserve rules, they can’t show before 4pm day one and can’t finish after 6pm on last day (or something
like that) . Give people more control of their schedule. Southwest reserves are guaranteed 15 days off. Money isn’t motivating people that would have the biggest bump (year 2 FOs).

 

I agree for the most partQoL is a big one but pure pay can persuade many. I do think if they make the pay disparity between WB FO and NB CA bigger it will help fill more of Captain bids. Right now $45 per hour can be made up by creative trip scheduling/PPU… if it were a hourly difference of $70-80 they’d get filled quickly IMO.

I’ve also heard LCA override is going to be close to$80/hr… company leaking this to get more LCAs on the books… we will see if that is true shortly.

 

A few points:

1. I think most of us are expecting DAL+ rates & general work rule match (including RSV rules) as a floor. That’s without even talking about the upgrade problem. While these QOL improvements will likely help with the upgrade problem, my argument is that the current market suggests we could (should) argue for additional pay incentives into NBCA on top of the things you’re suggesting. If we have an angle, we should play it- don’t leave $$$ on the table!

2. RSV rule improvements as a solution are geared at incentivizing junior upgrades. We should be encouraging the company to make the seat enticing to the many mid-senior (i.e., more experienced in general terms) pilots who are passing on the upgrade. These are all potential lineholders, so RSV rules are not a factor in their decision.

3. Money motivates. It does. That’s the fundamental principle of a capitalist system. The fact that money is not motivating today doesn’t mean money itself is ineffective; it means the amount being offered is insufficient.

 

This is incredible short sighted. Reserve rules aren't just for junior upgrades. It helps create movement through the ranks. It helps for when a displacement comes. And, especially these days, IT HELPS RECRUITMENT!

Our reserve rules are punitive. I just don't know any other way to put it. Being Narrow Body reserve over the summer, especially as a commuter (i.e. most of our pilots), is flat out hellish. (I can't comment on Widebody, since I haven't done it.)

I just can't describe the feeling I get when I consider upgrading to CA, but then remember last summer, sitting reserve....it makes me want to vomit.

If I were a pilot with options on UAL/AA/DAL/FX/UPS, I can tell you that UAL would not be number 1 on that list, especially when you factor that EVERYONE sits reserve at some point (oh, unless you were one of those people waiting for IOE for 9 months, getting 90 hours a month, then just magically dropped into a line above me, while I kept getting knocked down the ladder; another thing I'd like to see changed in the contract.)

 

If there is a pay split that comes up for vote as people are advocating for; would it not then be reasonable for those who benefit more to pay more in union dues percentage wise? So as a CA if you get a 30 percent raise and an FO gets a 25 percent raise, shouldn’t the CA pay a larger percentage of their pay check than an FO?

 

I think you’re missing my point. I never said UAL RSV doesn’t need a major overhaul. It absolutely does. What I take issue with is the narrative that fixing RSV is the way solve upgrades because it focuses on the junior (10xxx-14xxx or so) who would be upgrading into RSV & ignores the more senior guys (6xxx-9xxx) who could upgrade today as lineholders. Why are so many of them passing on upgrade?

So yes, fix RSV. Late show, better add credits, fewer days on, & volunteer only SC/FSB are all on the table. But do it because RSV needs to be fixed. As long as we’re still relying on 1-4 year pilots to command our NB fleet, I think we’re turning a blind eye to a greater issue.

 

A captain who earns 5% extra will pay 5% more in dues by virtue of increased wages. We frequently negotiate benefits that don’t apply to all without asking the respective beneficiaries to change their dues contributions. (Should we up the percentage a RSV pilot pays if they no longer have to be available early on their first day? Should WB guys pay a higher percentage if we increase int’l override?)

I suppose you could try this, but that would be an amendment to the union bylaws, not the labor contract. Still, would you present a budget breakdown of why you feel it’s necessary, or is it more just a desire to penalize someone who got a benefit you might not have?

 

Because why would a pilot hold a crappy line as a NBCA when they could hold a good line in their present position?

If reserve gets fixed, then bidding for a good reserve schedule over a crappy line becomes an option. That very well could attract the 6XXX-9XXX pilots about whom you're talking. Otherwise, those pilots are going to keep waiting until they're under 50% in category to upgrade, so they can avoid both our crap reserve system and the crappy lines.

 

You don’t understand how percentages work do you! 🤦‍♂️ it’s like the new “standard” for tipping moving up to 18% to cover “inflation” or whatever the excuse is. The mere fact that you’re paying a higher price means the 15% will net a higher tip. Same with your question above.

 

In my opinion, saying that junior people on reserve aren’t worth negotiating capital, or we shouldn’t be using reserve to fix our unfilled Captain positions is missing the whole point.

if reserve were truly built correctly, it SHOULD go senior! Who wants to be 63 years old and flying 90 hour lines? You should (ideally) want to bid reserve and barely get used. Bid reserve and have actual days off. Bid reserve and not get hammered with endless, random short calls/FSB. Bid reserve and yet still have some semblance of predictability in your life.

right now, none of those are true.

MRGS - Make Reserve Go Senior!