That is my opinion too. That would be an industry leading contract.

I always laugh when people say "We should be paid what we are worth." There is a big difference between what people usually think they are worth, and what they are actually worth. We are worth industry average. That is what the market has decided our wages should be. I believe we should be paid towards the top of the industry, but not far and above everyone else. Industry is also relative. FedEx and UPS are not part of our industry. They are cargo airlines which is a far different industry than passenger airlines.

I just don't want to see United negotiate another C2000, then take massive pay cuts and furloughs just a few years later because of it. I'd rather get Delta + 1 and be industry leading.

 

The problem is this company NEVER negotiates based on industry leading anything. They want you to be industry average (if even that). The only people who are industry leading in anything here are the executives in terms of their pay. They are the highest paid executives of all the airlines out there.

I'll give you that a case can be made about FedEx/UPS not being our industry, but Smisek's pay is based on their pay. Someone asked him at a company dog-and-pony show about HIS pay and he responded with something like "Well, my pay is based on Fortune 500 companies, etc. etc." Why isn't he getting something like airline industry AVERAGE? The next highest paid CEO of an airline makes a third less than he does in base salary. Where is his XX + $1 or 1%?? No, he'll use all the banks, entertainment companies and tech companies as a comparison. I guess the last one fits because he said in the press that airlines are nothing but IT companies with wings. Maybe that does justify his pay then.

Fine if you want to say that about FedEx/UPS but SWA IS our segment of the industry and they seem to do just fine. No they are no longer hedged at ridiculously low oil prices either. Management will do everything they can to keep SWA out of the discussions but we can all see the value of an airline pilot.

 

Competition contracts (high average) + economy (good times = +, bad times = -) = your contract.

You"re very wise. Seriously.

 

Wise? Unfortunately neither of you are.

That all falls apart if you take a look at Jeffrey's wages compared to the industry. Like it or not, we are the worlds largest airline. Count Chocula pays himself accordingly, (despite making a lot more than his peers), why should we suffer the same Stockholm Syndrome that you two labor under and not demand the same?

I have the distinct feeling that both you and iahliar were hired during our very colorful period in the early to mid '80's.

 

Don't feed the trolls.
These two management helpers pop up as usual to preach fear and accepting pro-mgmt. bankruptcy based contracts.
Do you two also pick up open flying/junior man with furloughs and think the post 9/11 rape of the pilot profession was necessary?
Or do you actually work in large buildings in Houston with the only "line" being banker's hours and large bonuses?
Really, the concessionist advisories from you two are so consistent and laughable, any relevance to actual line pilots is nil.

 

Too bad the UA pilots could have worked for FREE after 9/11 and United still would have filed bankruptcy. The revenue drop alone from 2000 to 2002 was greater than the combined payroll of every single one of UAL's 100,000 employees. But why let facts get in the way of a pre-supposed narrative?

UAL 2000 Total Revenue: $19.3B

UAL 2001 Total Revenue: $16.1B (the big drop occurred in the last quarter for some reason)

UAL 2002 Total Revenue: $13.9B

(source: Air Transport Association Annual Reports)

C2000 did not cause the pay cuts or furloughs, so why try to plan to avoid something that was not the root cause of the problem? Or maybe the UAL/CAL pilots should take further cuts in the JCBA just to make sure things will be OK?

 

Fully agree on your point CD, but as you prob. know, the ATA is airline mgmt. and their numbers are subject to said biases.
That's mentioned because many base their belief in concessions on obviously biased mgmt. or ATA numbers.
Somehow, somewhere, someone fed pilots "responsibility kool-aid" that made them feel
they were responsible for the airline's finances. Paycuts to save the airline, paycuts to pay for airplanes,
paycuts to pay the bank debt, paycuts to pay for fuel, paycuts to pay mgmt. bonuses and pensions.
There's a reason lawyers don't make arguments for the opposing side, the outcome for them will be worse. That's who we're fighting.
When we start fighting for our profession only, for our interests as new UAL pilots only, this ship will turn around.
Not mgmt., not accounting, not Goldman Sachs, not Boeing, not United Express, not Shell Oil, not other employees. UAL Pilots, period.

Interesting when one thinks about it, that bags are given more respect than pilots, with their "surcharges".
It's way past time for a pilot surcharge, just like bags, just like fuel, just like taxes, just like airports.
The only reason there's not, is we cave every time our costs come up. Think about it.
Mgmt. will not shut the doors for tax, fuel, aircraft or airport fees. Neither will they for our costs. They need all of us.
We need to start behaving that way.

Until then, they will keep chipping away at every section of our contract, arguing only their side like good lawyers will do,
because they know some pilots still think it's our responsibility to argue both sides and support their cause if something doesn't work.
Having a sympathetic opponent in the courtroom is a grand slam for them and we've handed it to them on a silver platter over and over again.
Time for that to stop and change. Now.
What's the definition of mgmt. again? Right, it's their job to manage how to make it work. Revenue v. costs. Not ours.
We need to stop playing airline managers, stop arguing their side and start owning and defending the profession of UAL Pilot.
FUPM

 

SWA plus 20%, is a start as a base.

TEN

 

The market comp for chiefs in any business is completely separate and different than the market comp for pilots. I truly don't care what Smisek's comp is...just our own.

As to the notion that "Count Chocula pays himself accordingly," the CEO compensation of UC Holdings is determined by an executive committee consisting of board directors. Paying oneself "accordingly" really can't be done at a public company with this type of board committee structure. I think your beef might be with the board. Nonetheless, it's still irrelevant to the market comp for pilots...large company, small company, whatever.

 

Again, your Stockholm Syndrome is shining right through. You don't care that Smisek pays himself 10 times more than the more successful Gary Kelly from SWA?

You may not care but I most certainly do.