Paybanding question.
02-09-2012 | 10:44 AM
#31
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Next contract?
1. Whomever is saying this will probably be retired by the time another contract get completed.
2. The 747's will be long gone by then as well.
I really don't understand the heartache with pay banding. We are negotiating a number (not a contract). Whatever that final number (overall cost of the contract is) is what we'll get. Paybanding saves the company money, reduces the cost of the contract, and allows room for gains in other areas of the contract.
1. Whomever is saying this will probably be retired by the time another contract get completed.
2. The 747's will be long gone by then as well.
I really don't understand the heartache with pay banding. We are negotiating a number (not a contract). Whatever that final number (overall cost of the contract is) is what we'll get. Paybanding saves the company money, reduces the cost of the contract, and allows room for gains in other areas of the contract.
02-09-2012 | 10:53 AM
#32
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Next contract?
1. Whomever is saying this will probably be retired by the time another contract get completed.
2. The 747's will be long gone by then as well.
I really don't understand the heartache with pay banding. We are negotiating a number (not a contract). Whatever that final number (overall cost of the contract is) is what we'll get. Paybanding saves the company money, reduces the cost of the contract, and allows room for gains in other areas of the contract.
1. Whomever is saying this will probably be retired by the time another contract get completed.
2. The 747's will be long gone by then as well.
I really don't understand the heartache with pay banding. We are negotiating a number (not a contract). Whatever that final number (overall cost of the contract is) is what we'll get. Paybanding saves the company money, reduces the cost of the contract, and allows room for gains in other areas of the contract.
02-09-2012 | 11:19 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Spoken like someone who doesn't like to see the big picture or can't comprehend what it means.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
02-09-2012 | 11:21 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Back to splitting the pie? B.S. Bring more pie to the table. I don't care about saving them money; I care about making me more money. I don't care about reducing the cost of the contract; I care about getting more from the contract. I want gains in other areas too! So you see, they need more pie!
02-09-2012 | 11:59 AM
#35
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Spoken like someone who doesn't like to see the big picture or can't comprehend what it means.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
Out.
02-09-2012 | 12:00 PM
#36
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
From: Le Bus
Spoken like someone who doesn't like to see the big picture or can't comprehend what it means.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
These are made up numbers, but say, for instnce, the cost of the contract is $1 billion dollars and the cost of not paybanding is $200 million, I would rather that $200 million go towards another section of the contract (such as pay rates) that will actually do us some good. If the company wants it, let them have it, just make sure we are compensated in other ways.
Out.
We're screwed.
02-09-2012 | 12:03 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
So what happens if the 747 is phased out over the next few years? How does that help us with 777 / 767 rates being that we had spent untold hours arguing to the company that a 747 should pay higher than a 777? It will be a driving force, alright, but driving the rates into the ground.
02-09-2012 | 12:07 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Have you ever negotiated anything larger than a new car? It comes down to the bottom line. Every single item in a TA has been costed out to the penny. There is a bottom line number that we can extract from the company and it doesn't matter (in their eyes) where those costs come from.
02-09-2012 | 12:09 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,559
Likes: 0
From: A Nobody
"The pay bands would be corrected during the next contract."
This statement is a joke, right?
Here's another thing I know:
Nothing is "corrected" in the next contract. Why? Because each contract brings a challenge of its on and to think "pay-banding" will be "corrected" is one of the most ignorant things one could say, let alone think.
So if you want and like "pay-banding" then its OK, if not don't vote for it.
You guys make things so hard, sometimes.
This statement is a joke, right?
Here's another thing I know:
Nothing is "corrected" in the next contract. Why? Because each contract brings a challenge of its on and to think "pay-banding" will be "corrected" is one of the most ignorant things one could say, let alone think.
So if you want and like "pay-banding" then its OK, if not don't vote for it.
You guys make things so hard, sometimes.
02-09-2012 | 12:26 PM
#40
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
So what happens if the 747 is phased out over the next few years? How does that help us with 777 / 767 rates being that we had spent untold hours arguing to the company that a 747 should pay higher than a 777? It will be a driving force, alright, but driving the rates into the ground.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
