Ual T/a?

[waveflyer]

I dont' know though Shrek- only 2 types and 1500TPIC w/ 7500 hours....??? Looks like somebody slacked in the right seat for a while! ... (kidding, i promise!)

 

[Shrek]

thanks mike- that is what i meant.
my true point is that i think 1st year pay needs to go away to increase our leverage in negotiations industry wide. how many of us actually go through 1ST year pay only once? our leverage in collective bargaining is our right to vote to walk away collectively- and always individually. it's difficult enough to give up whatever seniority you might have- but it would be a LOT easier if we knew that the next job didn't start you out in the gutter. Besides, i'm all for paying dues-- but haven't we paid enough dues by the time we get to the majors these days?
I'll say it in EVERY way i can. We need to make it easier to change companies or else the race to the bottom will continue.

Understand your point.

I thought that 1st year pay being so low, in general, was to offset training costs. I would never support the SW way of solving the 1st year pay problem.

 

[Shrek]

I dont' know though Shrek- only 2 types and 1500TPIC w/ 7500 hours....??? Looks like somebody slacked in the right seat for a while! ... (kidding, i promise!)

No problem.......I laughed a bit myself.

5 years Pt.135 on a JS-3100

Took 50% paycut to ride right seat at TSA 3 years. Career decision Pt.121 and jet time for the resume.(Go Jet made sure that I stayed in the right seat for that one)

Spirit for the last year..........

No slackin - just the business.

 

[waveflyer]

ahh... bad joke then... the upgrade can be a lucky thing in this gig. At all levels.

I've heard the training cost argument before, but i don't get it. What's so expensive about training a new hire vs. every other pilot that goes through training every time they change a/c. I think that's a convenient excuse.

Again- i think if everyone knew the average job paid $70k first year- many more would be more likely to strike, vote "no" on concessions, cut ties with sinking companies and move on, and would generally add a little bit of a warm fuzzy to the tummy's of the average pilot. For all the talk of seniority providing security- wouldn't upping 1st year give a lot more... you wouldn't even have to throw more money into the pot- just average the 1st 3-5 years...
oh but wait- that would require ALPA and APA and UPA and all the MEC's everywhere getting on the same page and having a plan...

 

[waveflyer]

Just examples of averaging 1st year pay:
NWA- year: 1=$30 2=$57 3=$69 4=$71 5=$73 ave.=$60
UAL- year: 1=$32 2=$50 3=$73 4=$78 5=$80 ave.=$62.60
CO-year: 1=$31 2=$56 3=$66 4=$74 5=$82 ave.=$61.80
DAL-year: 1=$50 2=$69 3=$81 4=$83 5=$85 ave.=$73.6

do the same w/ UPS FDX and SWA and it's just more impressive.

Is there anyone who wouldn't give up 5th year pay at $73 and make $60 for five years running if it meant avoiding that 1 year at $30?
Every day i talk to guys wracking up credit card bills funding this 1st year b/s- and it would make a difference the next time the company wanted to ask you for concessions.... think long term...

 

[bmxandjets]

Just examples of averaging 1st year pay:
NWA- year: 1=$30 2=$57 3=$69 4=$71 5=$73 ave.=$60
UAL- year: 1=$32 2=$50 3=$73 4=$78 5=$80 ave.=$62.60
CO-year: 1=$31 2=$56 3=$66 4=$74 5=$82 ave.=$61.80
DAL-year: 1=$50 2=$69 3=$81 4=$83 5=$85 ave.=$73.6

do the same w/ UPS FDX and SWA and it's just more impressive.

Is there anyone who wouldn't give up 5th year pay at $73 and make $60 for five years running if it meant avoiding that 1 year at $30?
Every day i talk to guys wracking up credit card bills funding this 1st year b/s- and it would make a difference the next time the company wanted to ask you for concessions.... think long term...

great idea..

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

waveflyer-

Good points....

Here are two mindsets to deal with....

1. In order to get first year pay up to $50+/ an hour, we'd have to get the more senior FO's and CA's to give something up..... It is too difficult to make happen, especially when all of the above just went thru massive BK cuts. Why would a "senior" FO or CA give up pay/work rules after the slash and cuts of BK for some newbie? (I don't agree with it). This minset is not exclusive to our industry...

Why do we have medical interns awake for 36+ hours working in the ER? The older doctors simply say.. "Well, I had to do it....so they new guys can do it..." So until the members of the old guard decide to make the profession better it shall continue.

What the pilots of UAL, CAL, NWA need to realize is all the great new hires are going to try for SWA, DAL, FX etc... Once those companies take the best.. the sloppy seconds are going to UAL, CAL and NWA. Now those senior pilots that didn't bother to care about first year pay get sloppy seconds FO's. Even after a FO goes to UAL, CAL and NWA he might still try for SWA, FX and DAL.. cause first year there is more do-able...

2. The company believes that while on probation a new employee is still questionable, hasn't proven himself and therefore low first year pay is acceptable. Plus low wages is the Holy Grail to management. Raising wages is like trying to kick the Jews out of Jeruselum... ain't going to happen without a hard core fight to the death.

Now, FX and SWA also have allot more play money to deal with.... kudos to DAL....



Combine the two mindsets above and one can see how difficult it can be....

Nonetheless, I agree with your position....

HOW.... should we change it for the better? It is one thing to come up with a great idea.... implementation is something else....

 

[IronCityBlue]

I agree that disproportionally low first year pay is BS, but I'm not sure who to blame, management or pilots. In any economic climate, there is only so much money available to go to labor. (Usually its considerably more than management admits of course). Of the money available, however much it is, once its negotiated/leveraged/forced or whatever, when it comes time to divy it up, first year pilots are prime targets for lower pay. You know, just have to "pay their dues" like everyone else, right?

It has nothing to do with the company offsetting its training cost, and even if it did, how is that any different than PFT? If starting pay was 50K but you had to pay 15K to get the job, that would be bad, I think we can all agree on that. So why is it okay to have starting pay at 35K like most carriers?

Someone brought up SWA, but that's not technically PFT as many pilots get on never having paid for a type. But in any case how can they be bashed for that when their first year pay is one of the highest in the industry? I'd rather pay 6K for a type then make 55-60K first year than not pay that 6K and have to eat 25-35K, and in some cases with no health insurance for 6 months.

In any case, disproportionate first year pay needs to go away. Not because it benefits management but because its little more than a pilot ratified one year B scale and that should not be acceptable to us any longer.

I agree with the post about boosting first year pay everywhere because that will help us all. Management enjoys significant leverage over us because our jobs are not portable (insert the typical never going to happen in a million years single seniority list fantasy here) but if all airline pilots could at least earn a liveable wage when they transfer jobs, it would significantly reduce our seniority based tendenancies to take sign any contract that preserves our numbers.

I applaud the Delta pilots for using whatever negotiating muscle they had at the time in keeping first year pay at the 50 mark. That's an excellent industry wide first step. I also salute the AA pilots for at least putting focus on the debate that disproportionate pay going away is a contractual goal of theirs this time around. Hopefully those two examples won't be isolated ones.

 

[waveflyer]

IronCityBlue- you get it, you're exactly right.

Rez= that's how you sell it. Again it's not about making a new hire's life more comfortable- it's about increasing leverage for the next downturn and round of concessions. This would take leadership from ALPA national, working with the independent unions-the membership might not ratify it if they aren't convinced that a majority of airlines will follow suit.

The money from a company side can come from averaging the first 5 years. So it's about reworking the first years of compensation- not taking money from the pot that could go to more senior folk.

But remember, we all benefit from increased leverage.

 

[contrail67]

waveflyer-

Good points....

Here are two mindsets to deal with....

1. In order to get first year pay up to $50+/ an hour, we'd have to get the more senior FO's and CA's to give something up..... It is too difficult to make happen, especially when all of the above just went thru massive BK cuts. Why would a "senior" FO or CA give up pay/work rules after the slash and cuts of BK for some newbie? (I don't agree with it). This minset is not exclusive to our industry...

Why do we have medical interns awake for 36+ hours working in the ER? The older doctors simply say.. "Well, I had to do it....so they new guys can do it..." So until the members of the old guard decide to make the profession better it shall continue.

What the pilots of UAL, CAL, NWA need to realize is all the great new hires are going to try for SWA, DAL, FX etc... Once those companies take the best.. the sloppy seconds are going to UAL, CAL and NWA. Now those senior pilots that didn't bother to care about first year pay get sloppy seconds FO's. Even after a FO goes to UAL, CAL and NWA he might still try for SWA, FX and DAL.. cause first year there is more do-able...

2. The company believes that while on probation a new employee is still questionable, hasn't proven himself and therefore low first year pay is acceptable. Plus low wages is the Holy Grail to management. Raising wages is like trying to kick the Jews out of Jeruselum... ain't going to happen without a hard core fight to the death.

Now, FX and SWA also have allot more play money to deal with.... kudos to DAL....



Combine the two mindsets above and one can see how difficult it can be....

Nonetheless, I agree with your position....

HOW.... should we change it for the better? It is one thing to come up with a great idea.... implementation is something else....

So...if a new hire goes to SWA he is great?.....maybe that is what he wanted AND had the $8000 to buy his type rating to get the job, unless he already had it which is usually not the case. UAL,CAL, and NWA new hires are not sloppy seconds...pro rate the $8000 needed to get the job at SWA over 12 months, and the difference is much less. Maybe it is just a personal preference and no one can control the outcome of a interview. Congrats to all new hires no matter where you end up. That post actually made me laugh...THANKS!

 

[waveflyer]

.......ahh what's the saying again... now i'm messing it up:

"Our esteem issues cost us greatly"

Congrats to everyone who passed a major interview- to pass is an accomplishment anywhere.

But first year pay should be increased. And you know which airlines you are. For all the talk of jetblue, and swa back in the day, and skybus and va- this first year pay tradition does a lot of damage to our leverage as well. It's time to get rid of it- AND the bankruptcy contracts.

 

[PCL_128]

IronCityBlue- you get it, you're exactly right.

Rez= that's how you sell it. Again it's not about making a new hire's life more comfortable- it's about increasing leverage for the next downturn and round of concessions. This would take leadership from ALPA national, working with the independent unions-the membership might not ratify it if they aren't convinced that a majority of airlines will follow suit.

The money from a company side can come from averaging the first 5 years. So it's about reworking the first years of compensation- not taking money from the pot that could go to more senior folk.


But remember, we all benefit from increased leverage.

I agree with you on principle, but the problem is that you'll never have any luck in convincing rank-and-file pilots to vote for what you're suggesting simply because of increased leverage down the road. Remember, even after two decades of scope erosion and the resultant loss of bargaining leverage, most mainline pilots still don't get the picture about the importance of scope. You're thinking about this from a strategic standpoint, but the average line pilot is only thinking about "me, me, me, right now!!!"

 

[waveflyer]

I agree with you on principle, but the problem is that you'll never have any luck in convincing rank-and-file pilots to vote for what you're suggesting simply because of increased leverage down the road. Remember, even after two decades of scope erosion and the resultant loss of bargaining leverage, most mainline pilots still don't get the picture about the importance of scope. You're thinking about this from a strategic standpoint, but the average line pilot is only thinking about "me, me, me, right now!!!"

I'm an average line pilot-
So either i'm an exceptional pilot w/ great ideas- or there are others thinking as long term as i am.

i will say that it won't happen w/o good leadership who are sold on the idea and willing to sell it. How about you begin with airtran and i'll work on my end?

 

[Chairman]

First year pay at United is around 14 months or more. Clock starts ticking a year from your checkride.

Chairman!

 

[PCL_128]

I'm an average line pilot-

So either i'm an exceptional pilot w/ great ideas- or there are others thinking as long term as i am.

It's the former. You are not thinking like the typical rank-and-file member. Go into your crew room and find a 5-year FO. Ask him what he thinks about taking a lower payrate on the next contract so that money can be apportioned towards the first year pay instead. He'll probably take a swing at you before you even have a chance to explain the long-term bargaining advantage.

How about you begin with airtran and i'll work on my end?

I'm more concerned with scope on my end. And our first year rate really isn't that bad to start with compared to the other majors.