Blueridgeflyer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Posts
- 116
The maximum should be derived by a proper balance between employee value and a fair return to BRK.What's the maximum?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The maximum should be derived by a proper balance between employee value and a fair return to BRK.What's the maximum?
Is Gutshot a negotiator? If he is then present it, if not then what's the point of presenting the idea here.
What's the maximum?
No, I don't yet. The number is highly dependant on the rest of the sections. You should know that.
Once again iMac dog, what do you consider an appropriate raise?
Awesome, Dicko. How much revenue does that 777 bring in on a typical flight?
But I thought flylow and Fisch didn't want to be compared to the airlines?Here's one way to look at it:
Your company will operate a jet thats only equal in range is a 777 or higher. A jet that operates at cruise speeds that exceed a 777 or higher. A jet that provides a level of service, security, luxury and privacy that far exceeds the most expensive seat on any commercial jet in the world. Singapore Airlines first class included.
A Southwest Captain makes more than $250K. A 777 Captain with a first class cabin makes more than $250K. What are Global 8000/G650 Captains going to make in China ? I bet it will reach $250K.
Every Captain responsible, for every comparable method of travel, is paid at that level or above.
Great question. How much does it cost to operate ? It's an economy of scale issue. The margin is surprisingly small. We could use a 737 as an example; The pay is still over $250K and the margins are small. I think the margin for a Global operated by NJA is better than a 737. Shouldn't that be reflected in the pilots pay ?
Boeing estimates that 50% of an airlines revenue is generated by 10% of its seats. That 10% is the premium seating.The cost of those seats is chump change compared to what a NJ owner pays.
My point is; the owners are expecting the highest level of transportation that is available today, and they're paying a huge premium for it. The pilots are being compensated somewhere between a well paid regional and a National airline. There's a disconnect.
Happy to be corrected. Hopefully the NJ Pilots negotiating Committee knows the answers. Good luck to all.
what are you willing to give up to get that 250K for a 7/7 10-year captain?
You know why I would vote down 10/250? It's not because I don't think I deserve it, it's because some of the guys that thump their chest saying they want "10/250" don't deserve it and I don't want them to have it
You know why I would vote down 10/250? It's not because I don't think I deserve it, it's because some of the guys that thump their chest saying they want "10/250" don't deserve it and I don't want them to have it.
Although these guys are a minority, I don't want them to get a penny more for their piss poor work ethic, behavior, and skills. You act like a professional, you get more pay. Ok, discuss........
Dude, seriously???
I'm sure you are frustrated, but why would you cut off your nose to spite your face? You don't want to bring home more money for your family because of a few turds? You said they were the minority anyway...
My thoughts on 10/250. The company is making enough now to pay it and still make hundreds of millions in profit. Unless the economy tanks again they should keep making more and more as they are selling a lot of new metal and add the mx costs go down and reliability and efficiency go up with the new and tougher fleets replacing the old fleets. While some profit comes from selling away old airplanes, this will always be the case since old airplanes will always be sold away and replace by new ones.
While the company could afford to pay it without killing the company, I strongly doubt it will come to pass. I just don't believe enough pilots here now will be willing to provide the leverage to the negotiating team to make it happen. I fly with a lot of guys who are comfortable and not willing to fight. They all claim they won't take concessions, but they sure aren't going to move the bar higher. I am doing my part to improve things. Broke is broke wherever it is broke. As an SIC I've been doing many write ups when the captain's wouldn't. I've been refusing to fly broken (hard breaks) when the captain's wanted to push on. I've been calling in fatigued when I'm tired while watching many captains who appear in worse shape then me want to push on. I have a strike/ furlough fund set aside to last almost 2 years if need be. I'm doing my best to convince everyone I fly with that they won't give us anything, we must earn the improvements and sitting on the sidelines now doesn't help at all. I like it here and I will stay unless we don't get large improvements. I will look at the whole agreement to decide if it is large enough and then I'll go elsewhere if the pilot group votes in a weak contact. Personally I'll probably leave if the entire package isn't at least a 50% improvement. I'm not sure if I'll stay in aviation if I leave or not. I just know I'll be too disgusted in my fellow co-workers to stay if they wuss out. It is very frustrating to watch the same guys who fought so hard in '05 not jumping immediately back in to do what they know it takes to get improvements.
NetJets had earnings of $227 million in 2011 and were "unchanged" in 2012. This is per the Berkshire filings and the 2012 comment is in reference to FlightSafety and NetJets combined so we don't know if one was up or down.
The question remains is how can people continue to say that the company can increase compensation expense by over $260 million and the company will still "make hundreds of millions in profit"? Netjets has never made $260 million in profits...
The math simply doesn't work..
If its 10/250 you guys will vote NO unless we senior pilots get 20/500 right?
Somebody thought that far ahead, I assume....
If its 10/250 you guys will vote NO unless we senior pilots get 20/500 right?
Somebody thought that far ahead, I assume....
NetJets had earnings of $227 million in 2011 and were "unchanged" in 2012. This is per the Berkshire filings and the 2012 comment is in reference to FlightSafety and NetJets combined so we don't know if one was up or down.
The question remains is how can people continue to say that the company can increase compensation expense by over $260 million and the company will still "make hundreds of millions in profit"? Netjets has never made $260 million in profits...
The math simply doesn't work..
Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference—the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.
That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen
Haven't you read Frederic Bastiat or Henry Hazlitt?
That is what is seen; you need to look at what is not seen
Remember ... passage of the 2005 CBA (that the company couldn't afford) resulted in record profit on the heels of losses!
The 2005 CBA was simply a more productive CBA for the company than the 1998... So will be the next CBA ... you have to look for that which is not seen.
Go back to the economy and Wall Street and overall consumer sentiment in 2005. It was party time all over again. Look at what's happening in the US and world right now. Good luck, but you're in new territory. Warren knows this.
It isn't 2005...