Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Alaska TA is out. Pay Rates.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
It sounds like the signing bonus will be given to retirees and will exclude or be lower for those on MIL Leave, etc. No retiree should see a dime, especially the ones who took the lump sum and punched out "early." This TA is very disappointing. Although I hate comparing apples to oranges, the proposed 12 year Capt. rate is far below the 1 year Capt. rate at SWA. What a crock! This is NOT the best we can get from a company that will post record profits over the next few years and wants to stick us with this for six or more years. NO vote from me.
 
Last edited:
I hear the TA will be mailed in roll-form. On a cardboard tube.
 
I'm pretty disappointed so far from what I've seen. And what's with not having a hard number for the signing bonus? Assuming its around the $13k mark, we'll see around half of that after taxes? No thanks. The FO pay needs to be higher in my opinion. There are a few things that are better, but I need to read the fine details in the reserve and scheduling section. As of right now, it's NO for me.
 
Well, keep on reading. I'm almost done reading the 292 page TURD and nothing in the TA makes up for the $hitty pay and the misley $13k chump change. I would vote for it if it was a 1 year deal; even that would be stretch. Beware of the spin doctors at the road shows. I can't figure out why our MEC/NC is SO excited about this TURD. It neither benefits the captains nor the FOs. I'm searching hard to convince myself for a "yes" vote, but I'd have to sell my soul to Lucifer. I'm tired of getting my a$$ handed to me. Please.... we didn't wait 4 f u c k i n g years for this S H I T!
 
Last edited:
You've got your answer, don't you? The Section 23 grievance is dead if this is voted in. No making whole, no back pay and back to work.
.
If that's so, then what'd we get?? IS COBRA reimbursement still going to be under the ALPA assessment? Are we going to get any kind of signing bonus? If it really is 13K then I say no thanks. The furloughees will only get a percentage of that and taxes will eat whatever's left.

And I kept reading that FO pay was going to be pre-Kasher. What the he!! happened to that?!?!
 
.
If that's so, then what'd we get?? IS COBRA reimbursement still going to be under the ALPA assessment? Are we going to get any kind of signing bonus? If it really is 13K then I say no thanks. The furloughees will only get a percentage of that and taxes will eat whatever's left.

And I kept reading that FO pay was going to be pre-Kasher. What the he!! happened to that?!?!

It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal! You stole fizzy lifting drinks. You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get *NOTHING*! You lose! Good day sir!
 
I am still on the fence on this one.

On the one hand I am very disappointed at the pay rates at year 4. I feel/was expecting the rates at year 4 to at LEAST equal pre-Kasher.

That being said the rates at year 1 are higher than what I was anticipating. There is a big difference between 16%/1.5/1.5/1.5 (what we got) and 5.5/5.5/5.5/5.5 which is how I was expecting our raises to be structured.

The signing bonus is about half what I would have wanted...

In my opinion one of the big devils burried in the details is the fact that we are cutting out all future new hires from having the A-plan option. 30 years from now who is going to be on property to protect whatever benefit I may choose to take from it. Do you think a bunch of non DB'ers are going to give up any negotiating capital to help preserve our future DB benefits. Maybe that's just one more reason to pick option C...which, by the way, has a DC amount that is WAY to low considering the normal replacement for an A plan is about 15% + or - 1 or 2 and since we already HAD a 3% DC this means I would want to see an 17-19% DC for me to accept a soft freeze on my pension.

As far as the new reserve system...Aside from the obvious benefit of 3 hours of pay and an extra day off I don't think I'm liking this long call short call stuff. I wanted our reserve system fixed not gutted. I like the concept of the current system except I don't want to lose my 'R' days so easy, I want the order of assignments less arbitrary, and I want them to PAY if they take me out of my zone to give me an assignment (even with a 12 hour notice). This TA takes away all my R days and doesn't do anything to address the other two problems I mentioned.

This may seem like I should be a clear "no" from my posts, however the things that put me on the fence are...

1. Timing - the economy sucks and we are the first ones out of the gate. The solution is to either sit here and wait with these REALLY crap wages until a couple of other airlines get better rates and the economy improves, increasing our leverage or take this imperfect TA and wait 5-6 years at better wages that won't seem so much better by the time the 4 years are up. Unfortunately we work under the RLA and in spite of the rumors out there, I do not belive that the NMB will release any pilot group to self help while the economy is in the mess that it is in right now.

2. MEC recommendation - I wasn't at these negotiating sessions and I don't know what the exchanges were to get where we are with this TA...and the people that do know, who's pay is also going to be affected by this TA...are saying yes unanimously and haven't been given any reason to doubt their judgment.

Anyway...I guess you can count me as a definite maybe.
 
This and the Row44 internet =$$

This is how they are paying for our paltry pay rates!


Prices going up for onboard items

Meals and beverages will cost $1 more starting May 1

April 15, 2009

Customers seated in the main cabin on Alaska Airlines will pay a little more for inflight amenities beginning May 1. Northern Bites meals, Picnic Packs, and wine, beer and spirits will increase $1 to $6 each.

Additionally, the price to rent a digEplayer will increase from $5 to $6 on flights between Seattle and Anchorage, Fairbanks, Chicago, Dallas / Fort Worth and Minneapolis / St. Paul, and from $10 to $12 in other markets.

The move will help cover increasing costs that Alaska is paying to buy and board the items. The new prices put Alaska in line with other carriers.

“Even with this change, our food offerings remain a great value and our prices for beer, wine and spirits are at par or below most other carriers,” said Lisa Luchau, director of onboard food and beverage. “Our meal offerings are high quality and a great value — even at six dollars.”

The only carriers still charging $5 for beverages include Continental, JetBlue and Southwest, according to Luchau. American, Virgin and United charge $6 for beverages while the price on Delta and US Airways is $7. Food on these carriers costs $6 to $10.

Alaska Airlines will continue to provide complimentary water, soda, juice, coffee and tea. Red Bull brand drinks will remain at $3 each. Beverages, meals and digEplayers remain complimentary for first class customers.
 
April is National
Alcohol Awareness month
Help is available for employees who feel they may have a problem

After seeing the new pay rates ????
I think we all will have a problem.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top