Anyone else get a phone call from United today?

[AA717driver]

You would have to expend tremendous amounts of negotiating capital to achieve first year rates that you are looking for. Companies are extremely resistant to paying first year pilots very much because they feel that a pilot hasn't proven to be a wise investment until after he completes his probationary year. Until then, he's still basically an at-will employee. Airlines spend tens of thousands of dollars on each new-hire pilot, so paying them $70k their first year also isn't exactly something that management would accept easily. You would have to give up a lot in other areas to achieve that. Most pilots don't feel that it's a wise investment of negotiating capital to achieve such high rates of pay for probationary members. I think you'd have a very hard time convincing your fellow pilots that it's worth what they'd have to give up in other areas.

That's why ALPA is done as a union. This "group-think" that prevents ANY new idea from 'rocking the boat' is what got this "profession" where it is.

The AAI guys really need your union experience on the negotiating committee.

Oops, sorry, I mean AAI MANAGEMENT needs you on the nego. comm. TC

 

[PCL_128]

are you saying you agree or disagree? or you just think it'll be hard? I don't get it.

It's not as simple as "agree or disagree." Would it be great to bring up first year pay? Of course it would. Can we make it happen? We can't even get pilots at AAA/AWA to agree on a seniority integration. We certainly aren't going to get 61 different MECs to agree on a single bargaining strategy.

The first step would be to consolidate power within the Association, rather than allowing this "every MEC for themselves" mentality. Captain Woerth's long-term vision was to centralize much more power within ALPA to stop these divisions, but we all saw what the radicals did to him. I've seen nothing from Prater to lead me to believe that he has the ability to bring MECs together on such a grandiose scale. To the contrary, he seems to have a real knack for getting us at each other's throats.

I do agree that your idea would solve a lot of problems in this profession, but much like a national seniority list, it just isn't workable at this point in time.

 

[PCL_128]

So you weighed all your options and chose Air Tran over a legacy?

No, that's not what I said. What I said was that AAI's workrules and payrates are just as good as the legacies now. So, to criticize current pilots at the LCCs for "lowering the bar" doesn't make sense.

 

[PCL_128]

Besides- i'll call b**lsh*t. A company spends a lot more trying to get a senior round dial pilot up to speed on a 777 than they do a new hire.

True, but that senior 777 driver has worked for the company for a few decades and has proven himself to be a worthwhile investment. The newhire still on probation is an unknown quantity, and management cringes at the idea of paying a large salary/benefits package to someone that possibly won't make it past the probationary year.

 

[MXAV8R]

What the hell does this have to do with getting a call from United!!! BACK ON TOPIC

 

[Lear70]

So you weighed all your options and chose Air Tran over a legacy? I don't think going to UAL or DAL was even an option post 9/11. You along with thousands of other people went to work where hiring was going on, not because an LCC was a better option at the time. Your choice may work out for you in the long run just another person's choice to return to UAL or try to get in as a new hire may work for him or her.

Actually, PCL and I both came to work here at AAI when several legacies, including DAL and CAL as well as SWA, FDX, and UPS were hiring, so yes, he and I both had options.

Everyone goes where they want to go for a reason. For me, I don't have any apps in where the 1st year pay isn't enough to pay the bills. That includes UAL and now NWA.

I saw AAI as being the next Southwest and made a gamble to come here, not knowing management would be this Lorenzo-esque in negotiations and try to ram a concessionary contract down our throats in a period of unprecedented (for this company) growth.

Now I'm getting involved to make sure that doesn't happen, AAI remains a good place to work, and our growth continues, whether it's through a stand-alone plan or mergers/acquisitions of other companies.

I still think staying here and trying to make it better is a better option (for me at least) than going to a Legacy with 8, 10, 12+ year upgrades and a 1st year pay that would require me to sell the house (in a terrible market), considerably downsize, and live on Romen noodles for the first year.

 

[Ty Webb]

To recoup training costs from the initial new-hire - that is why there is a jump in pay for the 2nd year at most airlines.

Puh-leaze. Training costs are part of the "cost of doing business", not an expense to be borne by newhires.

Some of you guys really remind me of parrots. You fly around, repeating whatever you've been told without questioning it.

 

[waveflyer]

I think the concept of 1st year pay was remotely valid when you could expect to only deal with it once when you were in your twenties.

Today is different. I've been through it 3 times at the regionals and about to start my first round at the majors. I'm not a kid coming out of college- i'm as qualified in my profession as any professional in any industry that is offered a raise and a successful salary when they join a company. My track record should guarantee what kind of employee I will be- And if it doesn't- then why did you hire me?

I disagree-= I think if ALPA national made it a priority and gave the reasons why- This IS something that everyone could agree on. It's not nearly as scary or divisive as what a national seniority list would be.

 

[waveflyer]

Adam Smith "Wealth of Nations", first Economics book. Rule #1 everyone looks out for thier own best interest, all economics decisions are based upon this assumption. I think it still works that way.

Good- and that's my point- When pilots are faced with starting all over at or near the poverty level- or taking whatever concessions are required to keep the company afloat= they will take the concessions b/c it's in their own best interests. But even still- you have to admit that simple Smith economics are not completely valid in a COLLECTIVE bargaining situation= the idea is to do what's best for everyone-- And I'll quote

remember A Beautiful Mind: John Nash economics are far more influential in the world these days

"Adam Smith needs revision...." "You do what's best for you- AND the group"

"if we all go for the blond- at best only one of us goes home with her- and probably none as we all BLOCK each other- And none of her friends will like you once she's seen you hit on her friend- But if we all choose a different girl- we don't interfere with each other- All of us get a girl=- and we're good"

....paraphrased....

 

[pilotyip]

Adam Smith's premise of looking out for your own best interest is pure. It is the ultimate motivator. However Adam did not have labour union in his presentation. BTW Adam Smith stated that Lawyers and Clergy were parasites upon a society for they produced no economic good.

 

[igneousy2]

I think a lot of you missed your calling as philosophers.

Everything most of you are saying is absolutely true. However, when a negotiating committee sits down to negotiate they have a huge list of things that they could potentially negotiate - pay rates obviouslly - vacation - scheduling - hotels - scope - base transfers - seat locks - training pay - retirement - travel benefits - displacements - furlough - etc - etc.

You only have a very finite amount of negotiating capital and when it comes down to it, you prioritize based on what would have the largest impact on the largest number of your members.

Let me put it to you this way - what would you be willing to not get/give up, and how far would you be willing to go (strike?) to get the first year pay up at YOUR CURRENT airline.

Later

 

[PHXFLYR]

In order for it to work, you'd have to get the MECs and pilot groups at virtually every carrier to get on board with the idea. As we've seen, getting two MECs to agree on something is hard enough. Getting a few dozen of them to agree is pretty much impossible.

And there we have it ladies and gentlemen. The classic ALPA mind-set of it can't be done, wouldn't be prudent, "ach-no-nyet" negative attitude as personified by Mr. PFT himself, PCL 128.How do you know if you don't try?



PHXFLYR

 

[PHXFLYR]

No, that's not what I said. What I said was that AAI's workrules and payrates are just as good as the legacies now. So, to criticize current pilots at the LCCs for "lowering the bar" doesn't make sense.

Maybe your workrules are marginally better than what Delta has now,but they have better payrates by virtue of having a widebody fleet for their new hires to move into as senority allows. One has to wonder if the higher wide body hourly rate that they would be able to bid some day offsets the hit in workrules you claim they've taken.


PHXFLYR

 

[waveflyer]

when it comes down to it, you prioritize based on what would have the largest impact on the largest number of your members.

This to me is the problem with today's airline pilots-- and it's why we've taken concession after concession- and why rates have not remotely kept up with inflation since deregulation. We COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN- meaning we should look out for everyone- not just the majority.

What if the Marines took on that attitude... and just left soldiers on the battlefield to fend for themselves.

When you look out for the junior - that sends a multitude of messages to management- that we won't be divided.

NOT ONE PILOT STRUGGLES

that's got to be the new motto. We've all taken so many hits- at some point it has to come to a head-- we're not talking about the comfort level of pilots anymore- We're talking about our financial lives-
-------------------------------------------------

But if you want a solution- in this scenario-- why couldn't you just average the first 5 years of FO pay? Wouldn't that solve it? Why would that be a concession to management? It's the same amount of money- just split up a bit different... But it would give us much better long term negotiating capital.

ie:
Southwest would average $93/hour first 5 years
Alaska- $67/hour
Delta- $72/hour
United - $62/hour
CAL-$65/hour
Fedex- $98/hour
UPS- $95/hour

Do you see how that is VERY different from having to revamp your life to $31 for an entire year to make a change....

 

[jonjuan]

I think a lot of you missed your calling as philosophers.

Everything most of you are saying is absolutely true. However, when a negotiating committee sits down to negotiate they have a huge list of things that they could potentially negotiate - pay rates obviouslly - vacation - scheduling - hotels - scope - base transfers - seat locks - training pay - retirement - travel benefits - displacements - furlough - etc - etc.

You only have a very finite amount of negotiating capital and when it comes down to it, you prioritize based on what would have the largest impact on the largest number of your members.

Let me put it to you this way - what would you be willing to not get/give up, and how far would you be willing to go (strike?) to get the first year pay up at YOUR CURRENT airline.

Later

What about future hires? Why not DROP first year pay and eliminate health care all together in order to add to your seemingly very finite amount of negotiating capital? Why not make the first 3 years at $hitty pay to even further raise pay and benefits for the top 2/3 of the list? Management laughs at the unions quick acceptance of first year pay as a 2 shot technical for them even before the game has started. "Doesn't affect me. Who cares?" WN raised the bar for first years pilots with a liveable wage. It's simply the right thing to do. Then again, they are WN.