All negotiating with a pilot group/flying as diverse as ours is a matter of opportunity cost… I think with your attitude, you will always see someone who has gained more from a new CBA than you have. So I’d be careful with that mindset, otherwise we’ll all be voting NO, regardless of how good the agreement would be for us as a whole.

The question is what is the threshold for the lowest increase in pay that is acceptable? If we all get a minimum 20% raise on DoS, but with changes in pay banding to the 767-300, or a captain override, some people get 30% raises… Is that an automatic NO? Do we need an exact equal outcome for all groups for a person to feel like things were negotiated correctly?

As much as all this sounds like hypotheticals, this will be our reality/choice here soon.

 

actually, I have no objections voting Yes for a contract that gives gains to people other than me.. Would I vote Yes for a UPA that gives Profit Sharing to 1st year pilots? Sure.. as long as it also gives PS to those who just retired. Neither one would benefit me.
But it’s the right thing.


Of course that’s not an automatic No. but would 15% given to the the group but an extra 5% given to NB Capts (to solve a company created problem) be an automatic Yes? Not in my book.

Delta just came out and made changes that adjusted paybands. And by doing so, they may have only benefited a certain amount of pilots (for) now.. but has the potential to benefit almost all pilots later.
To me, that is NOT robbing Peter to pay Paul.
but your view my vary!

I agree, I expect we will see a TA in a month that will require us all to view the Pro’s & Con’s. Hopefully our Union puts out a new ALPA PILOT COMPARISON booklet soon. (I brought that up at the last Union meeting directly to our MEC Chair).
Ya need good info to determine where we sit with regards to our peers.
Our CEO (and others in management) have repeatedly stated that “We’re going to be the Premier Airline” in the US and the world… ok, prove it!

Motch

PS) we don’t do a good enough job talking history-
at CAL, the 762 paid the same as the 764. We had Small Narrow body, Large Narrow body and Wide body paybands.
Due to the merger contract, we put the 763 and 762 together but off the Wide body paybands. We were told the aircraft “were leaving and don’t want to waste negotiating capital on them”.
The 762’s we’re sold shortly thereafter..
The 763’s..,ARE STILL HERE!
And, will be for the next 5ish+ years.. they are paid for and are a money maker.
So,yes.. if it pays more and that is viewed by some as unfair. Oh well.

Good discussion though~

 

All valid points. I appreciate you giving my responsive benefit of the doubt, despite the fact that I did not give your arguments the most charitable interpretation!

I personally am struggling with how the necessary “carve-outs” are gonna work. I know that I cannot be too selfish or too resentful… So just hoping the union finds a good balance.

 

Texting a friend of mine this morning. He’s on the 777 on reserve. He’s getting paid 73 hours a month and said he hasn’t flow over 30 hours in a month yet. Most days he’s flown is 6. Lives about 90 minutes from the airport, so short call is no issue. He said he doesn’t want to be a lineholder on the guppy. Why would you? Get paid 73 hours and fly your butt off all month?

 

It already does! Its one of the trip rig rules calculated for our pay. If we actually fly more actual and DH hours, we get paid more than our report time to final release time pay.

We already are calculating this pay in.

 

lol.. not sure if that was a slam or not. Pain killers are a good thing!

That being said, carve outs have been a thing since the dawn of time and will continue to exist no matter what.
We can only hope that any carve outs are to the benefit of the whole (in the long run).
At the same time, do the carve out help now but hurt in the distant future?
Again.. discussion fodder and important to look back at history.

No doubt that many of the past recalled Reps were willing to sell out this pilot group to benefit themselves in the long run. But I do believe that many of those now in position know what has to be done. Now it’s up to you, me and the majority of those reading these threads to stand both behind our reps and Union Leadership, but also next to them.

Motch

 

So you’re saying that when I report for a flight, and it’s delayed 3 hours for something out of my control, then I fly for 6 hours, I was really supposed to be paid for 9?

or when I’m ready to go and the rampers need another 45 minutes to load bags, which causes a delay…..I’m supposed to be paid for that?

that’s what I’m talking about.

 

WB reserves are a good deal if you live in base (SC range), are willing to have a day off rolled once in awhile (1 maybe 2x a month), and are happy with 73-77 hours credit each month (5-6 SCs a month).

What I don’t get is pilots bidding (voluntarily) onto WB reserve or NB Captain reserve and having to commute… that’s insane.

 

Lots of arguments for paying other than block to block but block plus XX per leg would be a way to give nb pilots a relative pay bump with a nominally neutral change

 

NB Captain reserve is 12 days off with a potential to make 90ish hrs pay that ends up having a lot of soft time (Fly one leg to DTW layover and DH back). NB Captain line holder gets 13 days off with very little soft time. The benefit of being a NB lineholder Captain with 15-17 days off, which was the main benefit of being a line holder, doesn’t exist anymore. Who wants to pick up a trip, even if you could, with 13 days off scheduled. The company can add all the summer flying they want. There is little manpower in NB Captain to absorb it. Commuting really is a non issue, you’re going to be working.