hmmm.. 15 days off NBCA line is around 86 hours and 19-20 days off WBFO line is around 75 hours line with at least one W, so I think it is a little more than 2k difference
even 73 NBCA 2nd year guy and EWR junior WBFO 2 year guy - 4.5k difference if we use 13 vs 19 days off
Thats 50k pre tax

Titles haven’t been the driving motivator for a long time, if ever. Money? I hate to say it, but yes, it most definitely is. Why have we never seen a WBCA vacancy? (And yet for the most part, everyone sitting WBCA would have a better QOL as WBFO- many to a substantial degree.) The problem w/ NBCA is not that $$ doesn’t motivate, it’s that the amount of money being offered isn’t sufficient to motivate for this position.

Think of it this way, if NBCA paid $1M/year, it would be our most senior fleet by a lot. (WB pilots in both seats would be bidding in.) If $1, no one would take the job. Somewhere in between, there’s a number that would get enough pilots to bid into NBCA that we wouldn’t need to beg every FO to consider it on their first year anniversary. The fact that we are doing that is evidence that the amount being offered is too low for the insular market of UAL pilots. This is very simple S/D economics.

I agree that money would motivate, but motivating the senior without alienating the junior would be a trick. If NBCA paid closer to WBCA and significantly widened the gap between NBCA and WBFO the left seat would go much more senior. It would be worth the work at that point and the vacancies would probably fill. Using the new Delta rates as an example, if WBCA paid $417, NBCA paid $390-400, yet WBFO still paid $285 you’d see lots of senior people bid captain. We’ll never see a contract get ratified where captains get disproportionate raises over FO’s though. Kirby either needs to figure something out to encourage upgrades or postpone the aircraft deliveries and slow the expansion to a more manageable level.

Maybe it’s the best they can hold. Maybe they have a sick spouse or kids in college and can’t afford to stay FO. Maybe you’re a pathetic YES voter on the Tumi TA and a management apologist. Maybe..

They don’t. The company is thrilled that upgrade is down to one year. All those who are fresh off probation are getting ccs messages reminding them they are eligible for upgrade. The company is courting the most junior guys for upgrade and TK jobs.

you never see unfilled WBCA vacancies because there are far fewer of them, there is still the perception of something special of being a WBCA and by the time people can get it they are usually in a stage of life we’re kids are out of the house and they may not mind to be more out of the house too.

I don’t think that NBCA necessarily needs to pay more. You need more guaranteed time off. Flying 90 hours every month while being jerked around by crew support is not appealing.

Unfortunately, more time off is not going to happen. The current NBCA shortage prevents that as it is. And it was clear from the TUMI TA that it is all about pilot productivity. So I guess we play the “catch eligible new hires” for the foreseeable future.

let’s see what it takes for IAH to tap out? Maybe we get to 1000 guppy CA?

More mental acuity: Making sure you back up VNAV with the 3/1 rule. If you don’t even know what that is, think twice about bidding the guppy.

we are lucky that they cannot junior man upgrades.

Basically what you’re saying is that it would solve the problem & get a lot more money for some of our pilots, but we could never pass it here because it wouldn’t make more money for all our pilots at once. Which I don’t disagree with, but I think it’s unfortunate & indicative of a self-defeating mentality we tend to see here.

Every time we talk about contract gains, people are resistant to improvements that don’t benefit them directly. Lineholders don’t want to waste negotiating capital on RSV rules, locals don’t care about commuter protection, NB guys don’t want to focus on WB benefits, etc. The irony, of course being that when we’re only willing to consider changes that benefit everyone, we all end up a little worse off for it. A great contract focuses on giving something to everyone rather than everything to all.

I don’t want anyone to get less, but the current market suggests there could be additional money available to the NBCA seat. Walking away from that simply because it doesn’t benefit everyone equally is myopic & self defeating in my opinion, since most of our pilots would have the opportunity to benefit from that increase at some point should they choose to do so. Anytime there’s money available for someone, I want to move it away from the corporate level & into the pockets of as many pilots as we can.

You think the primary driver behind WBCA upgrades is status? By that logic, it could pay the same as WBFO & we would still fill the seats. Guys would take on all that extra stress, responsibility, & loss of relative seniority- for status? I’m sorry, I just don’t buy it.

It’s money. It’s obviously money. Look, there’s nothing wrong with it. We live in a capitalist society. Our time & effort have an intrinsic value attached to them & when someone offers us enough money, we’re willing to sacrifice those things. When the offer is insufficient, we’re not.

If you want to say more guaranteed time off is a solution, sure, that’s another way to address it. But essentially you’re making the same argument. That current compensation is not worth all the work it involves, so you need to either increase the compensation or reduce the amount of work to find stasis.