If/When Spirit Strikes

[PCL_128]

PCL I just posted the contracts, did you look at them? BTW the orignial comparison was a senior legacy ramper gets paid what a junior legacy FO does, so what I said still stands.

You're still wrong. A junior legacy FO is making a minimum of about $60k today. The ramper making max longevity pay of $20/hr is getting $50k max, even if you include some overtime.

So we have just given up on first year pay, is that what you are telling me?

No, not "given up," but it's also not the highest of priorities (this is an area on which Rez and I disagree, BTW).

Air Wisconsin employees represented by ALPA, the IAM, and the CWA met in Milwaukee in late Jan. to launch a labor coalition at the airline. The coalition is designed to communication among the employees groups, develop a common bargaining strategy, and eliminate the threat of management pitting employee groups against each other. "It's time we stand together as employees of Air Wisconsin-not alone as pilots, mechanics, dispatchers, and flight attendants of Air Wisconsin" says Capt. Joe Ellis, the pilots' MEC.

You still won't answer the most basic of questions, AC: what good is a labor coalition if you don't use it to exert leverage through self help? What do you hope to accomplish with the coalition? It is useless without self help.

I also don't think Spirit is in good enough financial shape to handle a strike or even strike talk without resorting paycuts, furloughs and a possible bankruptcy filing.

What qualifies you to better determine this than the ALPA reps and staff that have confidentiality agreements with far greater access to this information?

 

[AirCobra]

You're still wrong. A junior legacy FO is making a minimum of about $60k today. The ramper making max longevity pay of $20/hr is getting $50k max, even if you include some overtime.
Sitting on Reserve, $60k? Even if you skin the cat a hundred different ways they are still a lot closer paywise than Mike thinks.


No, not "given up," but it's also not the highest of priorities (this is an area on which Rez and I disagree, BTW).
Okay read my United story, maybe it will change your mind.


You still won't answer the most basic of questions, AC: what good is a labor coalition if you don't use it to exert leverage through self help? What do you hope to accomplish with the coalition? It is useless without self help.
Better bargaining posture and management being unable to pit employee groups against each other.


What qualifies you to better determine this than the ALPA reps and staff that have confidentiality agreements with far greater access to this information?
The employees still authorize the strike vote so they should have as much knowledge as possible going into it. How much can I trust your competence look at anything, how much can you trust me if i was in your position? You did not get voted in based on your ability to analyze financial data did you? I will add this. When have you ever heard, confidentially even, a guy say "hey looking at the books this place won't survive with the concessions we are asking for" Any guy who said that would probably be run out on a rail. So do I believe that in every situation that what we are asking for is not too much (which usually comes down to senior guys taking from junior guys), or I might even add too little...well, not really. Sorry to be from Missouri, but both you and Rez have implied "don't worry Big Daddy will take care of you" or even worse "who are you to question anything we say!" That kind of talk always worries me.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

To quote for favortie patriarch Dick C. "So". ARW is not spirit.
Then striking may not work either because Spirit is not Northwest, United, or Comair where the strikes made us stronger!? So that argument works both ways.

Or it may work. What is wrong with you?

How do you know this? Do you have a business background? Economic? Have you signed a CA to look at Spirits books?
Have you? That is my point. How much do you know about economics or running a business, how about Mike O. He doesn't even understand the relationship between growth and profits. Again that argument works both ways.

Again, over and over with the circular logic. I started this thread with If/when we should support.

Then tell us. Kill me if you have to. (Like when Maverick said "I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you") But if you know, then you can tell the general popluation.

You can imagine all you want. Why are you smarter than ALPA E&FA, ALPA Legal, the Spirit MEC who have total SA (not you), and others on the thread?
I think we are all probably of equal intelligence. Its just that some people need to keep telling everyone how smart they are even though they have as about much education and experience as the next guy. I think the management of these airlines and their lawyers are probably smarter than us because they keep getting the upper hand. Maybe we should hire some of their legal people.

Or perhaps the laws and culture of this country facor business over labor....

This is your "radical idea?"
Seems pretty radical the way you are speaking against it.

Sure....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I doubt you were a UAL pilot. You suggest you were hired in the 90's if you were a FE and furloughed... probably late 90s. You should know this.
Sorry I haven't been an airline pilot for nearly 10 years now. You think if I can't remember my anniversary (it was my wedding day for God's sake) I am going to remember the year a strike that happened when I wasn't even at United. Two things at United just get mentioned the "Strike" and "ESOP". People don't give the years. Without looking it up I think the ESOP was 1998 but I am not sure off the top of my head. I was just saying we still felt the ramifications of the strike.


.

Even I know my UAL history....

 

[PCL_128]

Sitting on Reserve, $60k? Even if you skin the cat a hundred different ways they are still a lot closer paywise than Mike thinks.

Yes, even on reserve. The lowest pay would be at CAL, where they have some pretty junior guys not furloughed, but even there you would be pulling in that much. And let's remember here that we're only talking about the most senior of rampers at the highest paid carriers. Average pay for a ramper is far, far less.

Okay read my United story, maybe it will change your mind.

I believe the better answer to your scenario would be a provision to accrue longevity while on furlough, thereby returning from furlough with a much higher pay rate.

The problem with fighting for much higher first year pay is that management fights it tooth and nail. They'd rather give the 2nd year guy an extra $5 than give the first year guy an extra $1. To them, it's just anathema to pay a guy a high rate when he's still on probation and might not even make it past his first year, plus they're spending $40k on his training and he produces no revenue for them in his first couple of months. So, you always come down to the question at the end of bargaining, do we hold tight and demand industry leading pay for first year FOs, delaying negotiations for months longer and possibly having to go on strike, or do we get the extra few dollars in the second year rate instead and get the deal done? Not exactly an easy decision.

Better bargaining posture and management being unable to pit employee groups against each other.

There is no bargaining without leverage. Management doesn't bargain with you because they want to, they bargain with you because if they don't, you can eventually go on strike and shut down their business. If the threat isn't there, then they have no reason to bargain. The labor coalition is a great deal for increasing leverage, but it is not a source of leverage in and of itself. Only a lawful job action provides that.

The employees still authorize the strike vote so they should have as much knowledge as possible going into it.

It's impossible to provide confidential financial data to the general membership. Companies require confidentiality agreements for a reason.

How much can I trust your competence look at anything, how much can you trust me if i was in your position?

If I elected you, then I would trust you. I would not elect someone if I felt that I couldn't trust his judgement when he told me whether my company could survive a strike or not.

You did not get voted in based on your ability to analyze financial data did you?

Of course not; that's why we have expert financial analysts on staff. The politician's job is to relay the analysis to the membership. He is not doing his own analysis.

I will add this. When have you ever heard, confidentially even, a guy say "hey looking at the books this place won't survive with the concessions we are asking for" Any guy who said that would probably be run out on a rail.

ALPA reps across the industry told pilots following 9/11 that concessions would be necessary. When the data backs it up, the reps have no problem saying it. But when the data backs up big pay raises, they certainly aren't going to back down, either.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The problem with fighting for much higher first year pay is that management fights it tooth and nail. They'd rather give the 2nd year guy an extra $5 than give the first year guy an extra $1. To them, it's just anathema to pay a guy a high rate when he's still on probation and might not even make it past his first year,

At a regional probably... at a major.... probably not. Most guys at national, cargo(FX/UPS) and legacy carriers make it thru probation.

plus they're spending $40k on his training and he produces no revenue for them in his first couple of months.

So he is funding the expense of the simulators and staff to train him..... at a national/major this is unacceptable. New pilots at these carriers already bring loads of experience to the table. This isn't 1930-1974.

So, you always come down to the question at the end of bargaining, do we hold tight and demand industry leading pay for first year FOs, delaying negotiations for months longer and possibly having to go on strike, or do we get the extra few dollars in the second year rate instead and get the deal done?

There is plenty of extras that the senior pilots have. They double dip with seniority itself, then have the best vacation, schedule, benefits, etc... there is plenty of discretionary play money to negotiate within the top 30% to fund a fair and reasonable first year pay.

Not exactly an easy decision.

Who represents the first year guys? No one. Right now Spirit, Airtran, CAL and UAL are in section 6. The guys that will be on first year pay aren't even hired yet. So how do they represent themselves? Obviously they cannot. Therefore someone else has to. And they should. The noblest of acts is to represent the non represented.

The other problem is ..... is if first year pay is not corrected the new pilots that do apply are not going to be the best and the brightest. Yet that is what Capts will need in order to do their job and earn the double dip of seniority.

The senior get richer scheme goes back to the days when Capt was God and co-pilots (still the term at UAL) were pukes lucky to be there. Specifically the ALPA contracts seems structured this way, were at one time co-pilots had no vote at ALPA then they only had 1/2 vote.


I am also willing to bet that first year pay corrected for inflation is at the the lowest for the 2000s compared to the last 80 years.

Get first year pay and benefits up: Cap the max days off at 16 and flatten the vacation days for all pilots and get rid of longevity awards sans pay. The future of the profession depends on it.

 

[waveflyer]

I completely agreewith Rez-
our tradition of first year pay is huge leverage against us as professionals- and I'm pretty sure that mgmt knows that- their excuses are just that- bc they can't tell you that it is way easier to extract concessions when industry standard 1st year pay is below the poverty level and would bankrupt most pilots

 

[PCL_128]

There is plenty of extras that the senior pilots have. They double dip with seniority itself, then have the best vacation, schedule, benefits, etc... there is plenty of discretionary play money to negotiate within the top 30% to fund a fair and reasonable first year pay.

I think this is an incredibly short sighted strategy. The average mainline pilot will spend over ten years of his career at the max longevity rate, but every pilot only spends one year at first year pay. Sacrificing pay at that top longevity to trade for industry-leading first year pay is just not smart strategy.

Now, this isn't to say that I believe first year pilots should struggle. The traditional $30/hr first year pay is ridiculous, and that needs to come up at the carriers that still have it. But I see nothing unreasonable about DAL's first year pay, and I don't think it would be prudent to expend bargaining capital on raising that rate any higher than COLA in a new TA.

 

[waveflyer]

PCL- i'd like you to respond to my theory that first year pay decreases our leverage- Industry standard is so low that mgmt knows that virtually none of us will leave to start over at another carrier, no matter how insane the concession. I get your point above, and it's a good one- but it is also short sighted to believe that any one of us won't be having to go through first year pay at another carrier at least one more time, if not several. Making this a thriving wage instead of poverty would be well worth the cost at the top end. There hasn't been much empirical evidence that ANY of us should expect 30 year careers at our carriers any more. It is a different negotiating environment since deregulation, and one that IMO ALPA has not adjusted to.

 

[Tristar]

PCL- i'd like you to respond to my theory that first year pay decreases our leverage- Industry standard is so low that mgmt knows that virtually none of us will leave to start over at another carrier, no matter how insane the concession. I get your point above, and it's a good one- but it is also short sighted to believe that any one of us won't be having to go through first year pay at another carrier at least one more time, if not several. Making this a thriving wage instead of poverty would be well worth the cost at the top end. There hasn't been much empirical evidence that ANY of us should expect 30 year careers at our carriers any more. It is a different negotiating environment since deregulation, and one that IMO ALPA has not adjusted to.

We have a winner! Someone gets it.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Negative.

I think this is an incredibly short sighted strategy. The average mainline pilot will spend over ten years of his career at the max longevity rate, but every pilot only spends one year at first year pay. Sacrificing pay at that top longevity to trade for industry-leading first year pay is just not smart strategy.

I already addressed this. Those Captains need quality first year First Officers in the right seat. We don't want spoiled brats with a shiny ERAU diploma being the cream of the crop.

Again this isn't 1940. Basically, the final stop career carriers need to make it financially painless for a RJ CA to move over.

Probation should be an apprentice type professional status not a financial hazing process.

Now, this isn't to say that I believe first year pilots should struggle. The traditional $30/hr first year pay is ridiculous, and that needs to come up at the carriers that still have it. But I see nothing unreasonable about DAL's first year pay, and I don't think it would be prudent to expend bargaining capital on raising that rate any higher than COLA in a new TA.

Maybe DALs pay is do-able for a single guy, but there are real families out there having a tough time.

Again. Senior Capts. don't need 18 days off and 6 weeks of vacation per year while new hire pilots at CAL don't have healthcare and are making 30K/year and qualify for govt assistance.

Again seniority is a valued commodity itself, it doesn't need the icing and sprinkles and sparkles of high days off, large vacation times and other benefits.

The senior guys have let scope go and protected themselves too long and its skewed the system. Time to right size it.


Again.. I'd like to see first year pay over the last 80 years adjusted for inflation to see where its the lowest....

 

[PCL_128]

PCL- i'd like you to respond to my theory that first year pay decreases our leverage- Industry standard is so low that mgmt knows that virtually none of us will leave to start over at another carrier

I agree with your theory, but I believe the only way to correct the issue is to make it an ALPA-wide policy rather than an individual MEC's rallying cry. If we want to decide that ALPA policy requires a minimum first year FO rate to address your concern, then I have no problem with that. If you expect one pilot group to pay for that issue by giving up leverage in the higher rates, without demanding that the other carriers follow, then I think that's unreasonable and a dead-end. Most pilot groups simply aren't going to make it a priority unless a policy requires them to do so.

 

[pilotyip]

Remember all contracts are local in nature, that is why they are called locals. 727 ALPA members at FedEx make more than the 727 ALPA members did at Kitty Hawk, before they went out of business.

 

[osoaus]

Why not make holiday and weekend flying pay a premium? The people who want to go after the extra money and don't care about their weekends/Holidays, have at it.

 

[waveflyer]

You're right PCL
it would take leadership from ALPA national and CAPA-
and it would take local MECs seeing beyond their immediate circumstances and look down the road a ways
neither of which have been things our unions have excelled at in the last decade.
Increasing 1st year pay is the easiest way to address this problem:
that mgmt industry wide has been using our seniority system against us, leaving pilots- as the ones married to the airline financially, to bail out mgmt mistakes.
A national seniority list is the hardest solution.
At some point PCL, you have to get your head out of the process and re-evaluate the long term goals- Put down the checkers and replace them with knights and rooks- but you have to recognize that central problem altogether.

Btw- why couldn't you just do the math and consolidate the first 5 years of FO pay- adjusted for time value of $ so it's no cost to the company-?

Training pay if that's a deal killer could be made a separate pay scale-