AirTran Contract issues

[Max Powers]

Virtually every airline out there has a 12 year pay scale......should we stick to this and use the money gained(from the loss of 15 year pay scales) to help increase FO rates and junior captain rates?

I think so....we need to stop the whole sale sell out of our wages to the senior members!

 

[twepilot]

I just hope we get back to what we voted down... Personally I don't see it happening inside of 2 years from now.

RV

 

[Pimpin']

I just hope we get back to what we voted down... Personally I don't see it happening inside of 2 years from now.

RV

That's cool too because I'm in no hurry to give them 20-30K a year from our Reserve pay deal.

 

[maxblast72]

No doubt about it. We have some of the steepest pay scales out there causing a big pay difference between senior and junior guys. I think the wake call was the election results of the three votes so far this year. We will find out more tomorrow. The junior guys are finally starting to flex their muscles at Airtran.

For some examples of Airtran's steep pay curves compared with other airlines (based on B737 hourly rates):

1) Airtran 5th year CA makes 78% of a 12th year CA
2) Continental 5th year CA makes 94% of a 12th year CA
3) USAir 5th year CA makes 94% of a 12th year CA
4) Southwest 5th year CA makes 92% of a 12th year CA

Airtran has by far the steepest pay scales for guys basically doing the same job.

 

[RedDogC130]

No doubt about it. We have some of the steepest pay scales out there causing a big pay difference between senior and junior guys. I think the wake call was the election results of the three votes so far this year. We will find out more tomorrow. The junior guys are finally starting to flex their muscles at Airtran.

For some examples of Airtran's steep pay curves compared with other airlines (based on B737 hourly rates):

1) Airtran 5th year CA makes 78% of a 12th year CA
2) Continental 5th year CA makes 94% of a 12th year CA
3) USAir 5th year CA makes 94% of a 12th year CA
4) Southwest 5th year CA makes 92% of a 12th year CA

Airtran has by far the steepest pay scales for guys basically doing the same job.

edited...misread thought you were talking about FO..my bad

 

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

I just hope we get back to what we voted down... Personally I don't see it happening inside of 2 years from now.

RV

Have you saw the forecast for the 2nd quarter 45 million. KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL.

http://investor.airtran.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=64267&p=irol-estimates

please read, before you have such a defeatist attitude.

 

[Just thinking]

Initial proposal pretty reasonable (to start with)

NPA had a great starting point with its first proposal but it never got further than the web site...based upon the TA's that came out of negotiations. Reasonable pay raises, tighten the language that has resulted in every grievance for the past five years, clean up SAP I and II and open time. Reserve rules will get tweaked but trade it for QOL (plus guaranteed pay for each day and hard days off.)
SCOPE and merger protection should be paramount amongst every pilot regardless of position or seniority. There will be plenty of RJ companies that are getting larger and larger jets (170-190's) with the hopes that they can low ball a deal to keep their jobs. Legacies will be shedding the rj fleets that they own (American/Eagle) or re-assuming that flying back onto their list (USAIR East with the 190). If we fail to have an iron clad scope, we are setting ourselves up for failure.
New Year, new BOD and new hope for a progressive, reasonable contract that will ensure profitability and continued success for ALL parties involved in the process.

 

[Kenney G]

I just hope we get back to what we voted down... Personally I don't see it happening inside of 2 years from now.

RV

Your job is not to supplement fuel costs or any other. If you look at the forcasts AAI should be one of the very few to make money this quarter and record profits again net year. GET YOUR MONEY MAN!

 

[Thunderchief]

You got it right! Scope should be our #1 issue. Look no further than our brothers and sisters at Delta. If you fly domestic on DL, chances are better than 50% you won't even fly Delta, it'll be an RJ...
-TC

 

[twepilot]

estimates are simply estimates. I have no defeatest attitude. Realist may be more appropriate. Get my money?? I would rather get it over the long run bro'. Who said anything about supplementing their fuel? Again, realism..Look into it. Yes, we may in fact make money. But for a company our size a few million a qtr. ain't gonna cut it. Especially, if the economy tanks and we enter a "R".

RV

 

[Afterprop]

Reality Check?

I just hope we get back to what we voted down... Personally I don't see it happening inside of 2 years from now. RV

You just "hope we get back to what we voted down?" You are playing right into managment's hands ! ! ! :-((( As far as I am concerned, current book was much better than either of those two TAs. I don't know where you may be in the seniority list, or even where you came from -- doesn't really matter, but the last 2 TAs were absolute insults to the pilot group as a whole; not that most of them realize that. While managment may have a responsibility to the shareholders to pay us the least amount they can, I personally have a fiduciary responsibility to my family to get the most dime for my time. I am not looking for industry leading pay, but I refuse to accept low-ball offers.

Yes, I'm happy to have a job, but not that happy that I will continue to work at the bottom of the industry wage structure. Wait until the bonuses come out for the suits. I guarantee there won't be any cuts to their bonuses for the cost of fuel. We are flying some of the most efficent a/c available, with the lowest labor cost; and we still talk about cutting costs (crew hotels)? How 'bout increasing revenue -- that would increase the money in the coffers for all parties concerned: labor and suits.

I think there will a short window of opportunity for the new CEO and the new NPA to rapidly move forward to a FAIR TA and contract that will allow this company to more forward. Otherwise, managment and labor will continue to waste tremendous time and energy that could be better focused moving the company forward (to the delight of all our competitiors).

And it's not personal -- it's business.

 

[twepilot]

good points above...I agree on some...Disagree on others. We'll see what the future holds. I remain hopeful, that like was said above, we can have a new beginning.

RV

 

[twepilot]

BTW, July will be 8 years..717 Capt. Former Waterskier

RV

 

[Max Powers]

I agree SCOPE SCOPE SCOPE and merger protection.

 

[Lear70]

BTW, July will be 8 years..717 Capt. Former Waterskier

RV

Well, that explains it...

As an 8 year CA, you were in the minority of people who would have benefited from the T.A. with very few negatives:

1. No reserve, so you didn't have to work under those draconian new rules.

2. Increased pay rates, still not COLA but you would still be an 8 year CA making just shy of $140 an hour while new-hires were whacked with a pay cut to pay for your increase.

3. High enough in the seniority list that Scope likely wouldn't affect you.

When the senior guys start sticking up for the junior guys who would have been shafted out of this T.A. (not to mention the new-hires who will hate you for life), maybe we'll get something good.

Not trying to be rude, but I'm just glad guys like you are in the minority.

Max, I agree with you in theory. 12 year rates are just fine, with the caveat that they automatically increase (along with all the other rates) at 3% per year to account for COLA each year after the amendable date so we don't have this freezing of wages issue and back-pay.

I believe ANY T.A. should have that included, just so we don't suffer from management's reluctance to negotiate in any meaningful way. COLA is just a cost of doing business. Period. The employees DESERVE to at least keep their standard of living, even the senior CA's who are maxed out at year 12.

 

[twepilot]

dude, 8 years is about in the middle of the pack. I'm literally half way up the list on the 717. Your attitude is ostricizing half our group. If you knew me at all you would know that I'm not one of the "all for me" guys that you assume I am simply because of my relative seniority. I voted yes on TA 2 because of the environment down the road in the headlights. I felt that ta2 met many of my expectations and I voted for it. You may have voted no for it because it didn't meet your expectations. That is your right. As I have a right to vote yes for it. If you have an issue with me or anyone else voting one way or another I suggest that the problem lies in your lap not mine.

RV

 

[717capt]

twe:

Don't get drawn into a debate bud where the final outcome will have no impact one way or the other. It's done and overwith. I voted yes for TA2 as well. My reasoning was exactly the same as yours. I am senior to you by about 1 year and Lear is absoluetly correct, It would have benefited me, you and anyone else with five years of seniority or higher greatly. You are also absolutely correct in your statement about meeting expectations. If it met them, then vote yes if it didn't then vote no and take your chances. What if we negitiate TA3 and it turns out to be the same or worse than TA2. Do you think now it will get ratified? If it does, kinda makes the recalls pointless. Deep huh?

 

[twepilot]

it would be interesting to see how a vote would come out on ta2 now.

RV

 

[Britpilot]

it would be interesting to see how a vote would come out on ta2 now.

RV

It would still get a "No" from me.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

twe:

Don't get drawn into a debate bud where the final outcome will have no impact one way or the other. It's done and overwith. I voted yes for TA2 as well. My reasoning was exactly the same as yours. I am senior to you by about 1 year and Lear is absoluetly correct, It would have benefited me, you and anyone else with five years of seniority or higher greatly. You are also absolutely correct in your statement about meeting expectations. If it met them, then vote yes if it didn't then vote no and take your chances. What if we negitiate TA3 and it turns out to be the same or worse than TA2. Do you think now it will get ratified? If it does, kinda makes the recalls pointless. Deep huh?

The only expectations you had were pay rates? Because that is the only thing that improved, and not even by cost of living. Plus it created an 18 year pay scale. Now add all the negatives of the TA and your expectations must have been really low or your view of the next year negotiating environment are very bleak.