Hawkered said:
Alright then......
Family Guy,
I commend your ability to raise the stakes of sensibility and not to drown in the emotions of the message boards. I think that the company has not given us an offer that we can be serious about just yet, and yes, the union is being heavy-handed as well, which is just doing their job. If I can say one thing critical of our negotiating committee, they should never walk out of a meeting during negotiations-PERIOD! So much so, that's it's almost an unforgivable action.
Thanks Hawker....it can be difficult at times to ignore the rhetoric and dogma that seems to be prevalent here. Sadly, even though you and I can have a civil, professional discussion on these boards, it doesnt seem to rub off on some of the others.
I agree with you on the walking out of negotiations. I know it is a tactic that some negotiation experts advocate periodically, but in this setting, at this point in time, I dont think it helps anyone.
Does your comment about the lack of a credible offer from the company include the latest offer?
Hawkered said:
Family Guy, you can be as upset as anyone with the request for full retro-pay, but what offer did you exactly expect them to come back with you at? The contract became "amendable" in October of 2001. I'm not sure how we ever came under the RLA, seeing as though we don't fly mail or haul coal, but for all practical purposes, the contract expired in 2001. There was an expectation on the part of the old MEC and even the present President of NJA of "kick ass pay". What happened to that?!
At this late juncture, I dont think it is wise or appropriate to come in looking for $200,000 per pilot for retro. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to crunch the numbers and realize that the sums being demanded are clearly more than the company can pay and stay in business.
Clearly the pilots deserve a raise. IMHO they should get the most that the company can afford. I can not support wage increases for anyone that puts the entire structure at risk. From our vantage point, the total pay package appears to be a 33% increase. Does this fit the pilot group's expectations? At this point I'm skeptical that even a 100% increase would meet expectations.
Hawkered said:
Now you are saying that a First Officer with an average of 8,000 hours who comes to work here is not worth as much as a Flight Attendant, who is really only there as a CSR and fulfills no regulatory requirement on a Falcon?! Come on Sir! Get real!
First of all, I dont think I've ever advocated that a Flight Attendant get paid more than a First Officer. If you could show me where I've done this then I will apologize for my error.
However, after working at multiple different companies over the length of my career, I do know how these perceived inequities occur. I've seen a long term secretary make more than a new hire front line employee...happens all the time. Is it right? That's debatable.
The overall point is that LIFE IS NOT FAIR. If we are going to pay all jobs according to levels of responsibility then in my opinion, none of us would make more money than teachers, police officers, and fire fighters. No athlete or CEO would make more money than the President of the United States. Our military would make more money than it does. The list is very long......
As for our flight attendants, I suspect that you have two issues at work - a long term employee vs new hire issue, and also a union vs non-union issue. The flight attendants were only recently unionized. Prior to that they were performance based employees like everyone else and received their merit raises like everyone else, while the pilots were locked into their CBA. Is the situation fair? No. But that's the way things are. Now that the Flight Attendants have chosen to unionize, I suspect their wages will correct over time and you wont see FA's making more than FO's, at any point in their careers.
