CRJ 700 pay rates?

[antney]

Just wondering what the captain and first officer pay rates are for the CRJ700. Already have them for ASA, I beleive the only other carreirs that have them are Mesa, and American Eagle. If you can post them that would be great, even ASA numbers so I can match them up. Just trying to find an average pay scale for the 70 seats.
Thanks
Anthony

 

[SkyWestCRJPilot]

Also Horizon

 

[antney]

your right totally forgot ab out them.

 

[Paladin]

and Comair

 

[Mayday911]

New AWAC 70 seat pay rates (when and if a new UAL Express contract is granted):
CA FO

53.61 22.32
58.06 32.56
59.85 33.56
61.71 34.60
63.62 35.67
65.58 36.77
67.61 37.91
69.70 39.08
71.86 40.30
74.08 41.54
76.36
78.72
81.17
83.68
86.27
83.68
86.27
88.85
91.52
94.26
97.09
100.01

These payrates are effective the date of signing a new UAX contract. Every year after that they are increased by 1.5%. At 2.5/5/7.5 year marks the rates are raised based on the non-wholly owned industry average (6 companies) 50 seat Captain pay (F/O pay is then 60% of new Capt rate), plus 2/3/4% respectivelly. The 2.5/5/7.5 year average increases will be in addition to the 1.5% increase at the effective date plus 2/5/7 years. F/O rates are the same as the CL-65 rates.

Companies currently in the comparison group are: ACA, Skywest, Mesa, TSA, Chataqua, and one other that I cannot thin of.

Mayday.

 

[surplus1]

Are you serious? Those are 70-seat CRJ rates? They are lower than Comair's 50-seat rates.

Why are you guys doing this? Please don't tell me its going to save United.

 

[Cardinal]

LOL, You know it's bad when surplus is scoffing at one's payrates! United burns about as much cash in a day as that agreement will save in a year, but I guess that's the "price you pay to play the game" in these wonderful times.

antney, take a gander at what this site has to offer: http://airlinepilotcontracts.com/

 

[surplus1]

LOL, You know it's bad when surplus is scoffing at one's payrates!

Scoffing? IF that's what you think I was doing then I failed completely to communicate. Sorry.

I greatly admire the AWAC group and I think this is extremely sad. That airline invented what we call regional flying today much before most people writing on this board were flying anything. It's nothing to scoff about or laugh about. I just don't understand the logic of it. If you think that I feel in anyway superior to AWAC people you are gravely mistaken and completely misinterpreted my comments.

It is completely beyond my comprehension how lowering the pilot compensation at a regional could possibly impact United Airlines or any other mega carrier. Their illness has nothing to do with AWAC compensation and will not be affected by it one way or the other. By the same token, if CMR pilots were to fly for nothing at all, it would not be a pimple on the backside of Delta and we are considerably larger than Air Willy.

If AWAC is ill, then that's another matter, but I thought they were doing well. Perhaps I am wrong.

Another thing that I don't understand is all the rocks being thrown at the Mesa pilot group. Sure I think their contract is lousy, but I also know that it has always been lousy. This isn't their fault at all. This is happening because we're all rushing into panic mode and coming up with a lot of wrong answers. Mesa isn't going to suddenly become "the only regional in business" because they have a lousy contract. Do we all suddenly have to play the "match Mesa" game? How come Mesa didn't get all the regional flying before? They have always been at the bottom. If we didn't have to match them before, why do we have to match them now? Sure the industry has changed, for the mega carriers. What's changed for the regionals?

Why are we racing to the bottom? That's what I don't understand. If someone does, please enlighten me.

 

[Cardinal]

An admirable post, and for once I agree with you. I still find the earlier expressed incredulity mildly amusing. Green wallets and tailwinds to all...

 

[Russ]

Walk a mile in their shoes.....

Surplus
Easy to answer, they're fighting for their jobs. UA express contracts are to be awarded by a BK judge based on what a private auditor says. The criteria is cost, cost and finially cost. UA has for at least the next few days three quality carriers that deliver a quality product. That however has no bearing on whether any of the three keep the contracts, it based on greenbacks. If Comair was told by a BK Delta that you were going to lose ALL your flying to someone else in the next week or so, I imagine your folks might come up with something along the same lines.
There is a world of difference between striking and losing the contract that provides 100% of your buisness, if you had planned to go that route.

Consider brevity on your retort.

 

[j41driver]

...Another thing that I don't understand is all the rocks being thrown at the Mesa pilot group. Sure I think their contract is lousy, but I also know that it has always been lousy. This isn't their fault at all.

So it's not the Mesa pilot's fault that they have lousy a contract? If the fault for this lousy contract does not fall with the very pilot group that voted it in, then who's fault is it that they have now, and have always had lousy contracts? Looks like the pilot group to me. I'm not sure how you see it differently.

 

[Mayday911]

Surplus,

From looking at your contract and comparing its payrates to the payrates I posted above, the new AWAC 70 seat pay rates (not specifically a CRJ) are in fact higher than your 50 seat pay rates. Not by much but they are. Besides rates of pay aren't the whole story, our trip and duty rigs are much better than yours, so we make up some ground in that area.

Mayday

 

[surplus1]

Walk a mile in their shoes.....

Surplus
Easy to answer, they're fighting for their jobs. UA express contracts are to be awarded by a BK judge based on what a private auditor says. The criteria is cost, cost and finially cost. UA has for at least the next few days three quality carriers that deliver a quality product. That however has no bearing on whether any of the three keep the contracts, it based on greenbacks.

Consider brevity on your retort.

Thanks for the reply. I will consider brevity and try to comply, but first let me say that "brevity" is a part of our problem. This entire industry problem is a highly complex equation. It is not a warning light on an instrument panel with a predetermined check list response under the heading of "Concessions". There are no "immediate action" or memory items. As pilots we are conditioned to a particular response for every problem that man can think of. The trouble is, this is not an airplane problem and it is not a pilot problem at all. This is an economic problem and pilots are no better at economics than economists. We are where we are precisely because the "economists" and the MBA's were all wrong. Their responses to the problems as well as their knee-jerk reactions/solutions have so far done little to change anything for the better and have often made it worse. Do WE really need to copy that? In our rush to brevity (spelled concessions) we may well be leaving the correct responses behind.

In my opinion our "rushed" response is much like hurrying the preflight then wondering why the Cessna won't move at full throttle, because we forgot to untie the tail or, if you prefer, flying the perfect approach, flaring at exactly the right time and then "cussing" about the loud noises that result from our failure to lower the gear. As we collectively rush to give up all or part of the gains that it has taken us years to procure, do we really believe that this will somehow miraculously change the behavior of the MBA's that got us here in the first place? I do not. That wasn't brief at all, but maybe you get my idea.

If I could believe that these economic decisions were really going to "save the jobs" you say we are fighting for, I might be willing to jump on the bandwagon. However, right or wrong, I do NOT believe that. We aren't going to "save" anything by a pay cut at a Comair or an Air Wisconsin. All that we're really doing is contributing to a management created domino effect. Neither one of those airlines or their "costs" contributed to the problem at the majors. Both are making money, today, with the cost structure that they already have.

Yes, there is now a differential between the cost structure of Mesa and the cost structure of AWAC or ACA or CMR. That difference was there before any of this began. So we take concessions and we narrow the gap. They respond by taking concessions themselves and restore the gap to exactly what it was before. We repeat our response, etc. Where does it end? Do we just keep lowering our compensation until we wind up paying the airline for the priviege of working there? Where is the bottom and why are we helping the MBA's by pushing over the dominoes ourselves?

If Comair was told by a BK Delta that you were going to lose ALL your flying to someone else in the next week or so, I imagine your folks might come up with something along the same lines.

You are probably right, but that does NOT mean it would be the correct response, and that helps to make my point. The fact is that Delta doesn't have to be bankrupt for Comair to lose all its flying. Delta owns Comair and there is nothing at all to prevent them from transferring ALL our airplanes to another subsidiary or subcontractor whenever they chose. They don't have to be BK to do that. Just like United doesn't have to be BK to cancel the AWAC contract. All of those contracts have escape clauses that allow the contracting carrier to back out of the deal in a relatively short time. That was there before the downturn and the bankruptcies, and it will stay there after you have made all your "concessions". It's no different at Comair. As a matter of fact it is easier to put us out of business than it was before Delta owned the airline.

If Comair pilots all rushed to offer to fly for nothing tomorrow, that would NOT prevent Delta from selling us off or shutting us down if that's what they really want to do. Therefore, there is no reason for us to fall on our swords and give up our contract in and effort to prevent what we are truly powerless to prevent. The same applies to the other regionals. We are not "saving our jobs" at all. The concessions we are making can't really do that.

We play directly into the hand of management when we let them make us afraid of what they might do. That's how they want us to react and we're doing it. If we all stood our ground, what do you suppose they would do next?

The problem, as I see it, is that they tell us it's raining a lot and there's going to be a flood. We then rush over to the dam and make a hole in its structure, thereby guaranteeing the flood. I say, let it rain. We are already the "Ark" of the majors and the only boats that are floating securely. If they sink those Arks too, it will not stop their big ships from floundering, it will just put them all in the water with no Ark to fall back on. I'll bet they aren't about to do that; they are not stupid and they aren't going to sink the life rafts.

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself". - FDR. So far they are doing an excellent job of putting that "fear" in us, and we're helping them. They (the MBA's) have claimed that the cause of the difficulties is primarily the compensation of pilots and we apparently believe that. In the mega airlines like AA, UAL, DAL, the compensation packages of ALL the employees (not just the pilots) may be a contributing factor, but not the cause.

At the regional airlines, the compensation packages of the pilots do not contribute in any way to the problems. Neither does the compensation of non-pilot employees. Which of the regional jet operators is losing money today? Can you name one? If we are not contributing to the "problem", just how is our making unnecessary conessions going to solve it?

Why are we running the Engine Fire checklist and requesting an emergency descent, when our problem is a deferred coffee pot? Maybe we could just serve Coke instead of coffee and press on. Instead, we seem to be all rushing pell mell into a bidding war against each other for the flying. That doesn't strike me as the "way to go".

Sorry I wasn't brief. I know that sometimes you have to eat a sh*t sandwich, but in our operations it's not even lunch time, let alone dinner hour and I don't particularly like sh*t sandwiches. Maybe we should have skipped that meal, instead of swallowing the crap.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,

From looking at your contract and comparing its payrates to the payrates I posted above, the new AWAC 70 seat pay rates (not specifically a CRJ) are in fact higher than your 50 seat pay rates. Not by much but they are. Besides rates of pay aren't the whole story, our trip and duty rigs are much better than yours, so we make up some ground in that area.

Mayday

Perhaps I made a mistake, but I don't think so. Take another look. I compared the numbers you posted to the rates that will take effect at my airline on 6/22/03, only a month away. We'll be there by the time your new scale takes effect (if it does.) I compared the scales that you posted at 3 different leves for both CA and FO. This is what I got.

CA Lower by FO Lower by

5 yr $1.89 2 yr $3.19

10 yr $2.21 5 yr $3.49

15 yr $2.56 8 yr $3.83

I agree completely that rates of pay are only a part of the equation. I also agree that your rigs used to be better than ours but only in part. Our duty rigs is 1:2, trip rig is 1:375, Min day is a look-back 4:20. Based on what I read in a summary of your TA, your new rigs were also modified to what is pretty much a wash. We don't fly much "soft" time anyway, but perhaps you do.

Again, I didn't compare 70 to 70 or the differences would have been much higher. I compared your 50 to our 70. I'm scared to ask what your new book rates for the 50 might be.

I'm not trying to make waves or generate a dispute, but at the same time, facts are facts and these comparisons have to be made no matter how unpleasant they may be.

You don't have any 70-seaters right now and we don't have any 146's. If you get 70-seaters, you will have undercut us by a substantial per/hour difference. There is reason for concern. We have never compared ourselve to MES, but you are a different ball game.

 

[pimpinthesky]

crj payrates

Wow and i thought the pcl air group was getting rapped with their contract that is
5 years old

 

[Singlecoil]

Horizon CRJ-700 CA pay

The most junior CRJ-700 CA is at about the 14 year mark, believe it or not

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1st year 60.14 61.94 64.11 66.68 69.68
2nd year 62.01 63.87 66.10 68.75 71.84
3rd year 63.91 65.83 68.13 70.85 74.04
4th year 65.90 67.87 70.25 73.06 76.35
5th year 67.94 69.98 72.43 75.32 78.71
6th year 70.04 72.14 74.66 77.65 81.15
7th year 72.20 74.37 76.97 80.05 83.65
8th year 74.43 76.66 79.35 82.52 86.23
9th year 77.44 79.76 82.55 85.85 89.72
10th year 80.55 82.97 85.87 89.31 93.32
11th year 83.03 85.52 88.52 92.06 96.20
12th year 85.61 88.17 91.26 94.91 99.18
13th year 88.26 90.91 94.09 97.85 102.26
14th year 90.98 93.71 96.99 100.87 105.41
15th year 93.80 96.61 99.99 103.99 108.67
16th year 96.61 99.51 102.99 107.11 111.93
17th year 99.51 102.49 106.08 110.32 115.28
18th year 102.49 105.56 109.26 113.63 118.74

CRJ-700 FO's

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1st year 24.25 24.98 25.85 26.89 28.10
2nd year 35.70 36.77 38.06 39.58 41.36
3rd year 36.75 37.85 39.18 40.74 42.58
4th year 37.80 38.93 40.30 41.91 43.79
5th year 38.85 40.02 41.42 43.07 45.01
6th year 39.90 41.10 42.54 44.24 46.23
7th year 40.95 42.18 43.65 45.40 47.44
8th year 42.00 43.26 44.77 46.57 48.66

 

[Russ]

Surplus
I don't think you understand the gravity of the situation at the express carriers.

You are arguing in a different plane of thought. You speak in grandiose terms of where we as regionals are, how we got here and where we are heading. All laudable and strike a sympathetic chord with me and I have to believe most others. This theoretical banter however blinds you to the visceral level of survival mentality that exists at ACA, AWAC and SkyWest. The demise or extreme downsizing of one or all of them is at hand. The cancer doc is walking twords the room with the diagnosis. Is UA's cancer malignent and benign for the express carriers?

It is hard to raise the bar for regional carriers if your not working in the profession. The basic hierarchy of personal needs must be met before one can champion some greater cause. My mortgage payment is due on the first regardless if I keep my job or Mesa, et al get the contracts. Yes, what is happening is a step back. It is however not one that is unique to the regional, or majors for that matter. This downturn covers the spectrum of business. If my company wishes to survive, we must adapt or perish, it really is that black and white right now. Do I like it? No sir. Do I accept it? Yes because the alternative is to not acceptable to me. Do I expect it to get better as we emerge from this downturn? I sure as heck hope so.

I hope folks like you keep posting so we can see where we should
be heading in theory.


Sorry, no time to spell/grammer check....