jetBlue Captain Pay?

[Kid Charlemagne]

Response to Blue Dude

Blue Dude,

First of all I want to contrast your response to that of dgs. While he resorted to making threats cause he can't abide someone having a different opinion (he must be God or something since he knows for a fact he's right)....you took several of my points and responded to them logically. You are to be commended for that and I also happen to agree with some of what you said, and disagree with other things. And that's the whole point point of this forum isn't it? Hopefully people like dgs won't be allowed to become the Gestapo and shut down the free exchange of ideas on this board. Now that I got that off my chest:

Blue Dude said:
"If you were at JetBlue, would you still be up in arms if the "industry standard" came down to meet us, and JetBlue was therefore taking care of you in relation to the industry as a whole? Would you then be content since everyone else is "suffering" equally? If so, then maybe you need to reexamine your priorities. Someone else's loss isn't your gain. And if your pay is adequate, then it is adequate in an absolute sense, no matter if everyone else is paid three times as much."


Blue Dude,
I disagree with that. In any line of work how are you to determine if you are being compensated "adequately"? I say the only way you can determine that is by examining the pay your peers get. If everyone is to be paid only what is "adequate" then what you have is the socialism you seem to rail against so much. Remember the Communist ideal - "From each according to his talents, to each according to his needs"? So while 50k a year might be perfectly adequate as a living wage (in some cities anyway) for a tradesman, would you expect a brain surgeon in that same geographic area to make the same pay? After all, if the surgeon only needs "adequate" compensation, why can't the hospital save money by just paying him the 50k? And if you wouldn't agree to that, why wouldn't you? Because you know that brain surgeon would be GROSSLY UNDERPAID BASED ON HIS PEER GROUP AVERAGE INCOME, even though he might be able to survive just fine on the "adequate" pay of 50k a year. That's the same principle I'm talking about. But I agree with you that management has done right by us so far, and I have some patience to wait and see if they do the right thing and bring our hourly pay closer to industry standard (I use SWA as the benchmark) in the short term. After all, we're making record profits right? Time to share the wealth, that's all I'm saying.....and let's all work together to be successful.

Blue Dude also said:
"Sure, that's correct, profit sharing won't pay the bills, and it doesn't mean that we have some kind of hidden pay raise. It will however accrue tax deferred for a long, long time in an account in your name. (Are you listening, Intruder?) You can't spend the money until you retire, but you can't lose it either, no matter what happens to the company"


Blue Dude,
I agree with you on this my brotha. I wasn't knocking our profit sharing, it is a very nice supplement to our retirement package. I just wanted to clear something up - some guys were posting that JetBlue captains don't need a raise cause we get lots of profit sharing. I thought that might lead some to conclude that our profit sharing is SPENDABLE, just like hourly pay you get in the form of a paycheck is spendable. So I wanted to get rid of that misconception and point out that we can't get at that money until retirement age, which for many of us is decades away. And as far as saying you can't lose it....well, yes you can. Depends on how your investments do....the past three years have made painfully obvious the fact that stocks go down as well as up.


And finally, Blue Dude said:
"OK, Kid, I wouldn't dream of speaking for you, especially since it appears you're not even a JetBlue pilot."


Blue Dude,
WRONG

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

dgs edits his post

dgs,

I see you edited your post and removed the threat you made. Probably a wise move my friend. Consider it a lesson learned???

If you want to post an apology I'll be happy to read it. Your call...

 

[dgs]

Kid -- You missed my point. It was not meant as a threat. Sorry you took it that way. Anonymity does not give you the right to misrepresent yourself and/or perspectives of jetBlue employees. Like Mr. Concorde who tried to convince everybody that he flew the Concorde. If you are truly what you say you are, then how do you answer the disconnects between you asking about jetBlue's hiring in February and claiming to be a Captain here in April? Which time were your misrepresenting yourself?

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

This is what happens when you assume

dgs said:
"Kid -- You missed my point. It was not meant as a threat. Sorry you took it that way."

dgs,
OK, if that's really how you meant it.....I'll consider myself satisfied and drop this issue. Apology accepted.


dgs said:
"If you are truly what you say you are, then how do you answer the disconnects between you asking about jetBlue's hiring in February and claiming to be a Captain here in April? Which time were your misrepresenting yourself?"

dgs,
You are assuming to much. Because I was discussing JetBlue's hiring and asking questions about our hiring process, you automatically assumed I was looking for a job with JBLU. WRONG. I never said that - you just chose to read it into my remarks or questions. So I never misrepresented myself. Hope that clears this up for ya.....

 

[Blue Dude]

Re: Response to Blue Dude

In any line of work how are you to determine if you are being compensated "adequately"? I say the only way you can determine that is by examining the pay your peers get. If everyone is to be paid only what is "adequate" then what you have is the socialism you seem to rail against so much. Remember the Communist ideal - "From each according to his talents, to each according to his needs"?

No, no, no, I said nothing about being paid according to my "need", whatever that is. I meant that the pay is adequate for me, to maintain the lifestyle I want. It is "adequate" in the sense that it is enough for what I want in life, and therefore that's good enough. Comparing my pay to others' to determine whether I ought to be satisfied with the lifestyle my pay provides for me is groupthink, penis envy, and worse. Put another way: my satisfaction is determined by my desired and obtained lifestyle (provided that my pay will cover the cost, and it currently does), not the size of my paycheck, and certainly not the size of someone else's. But I'm not an ascetic, and I'm not saying that I'll never want more. (I was perhaps too strong in saying that today's pay will always be "adequate". I was trying to make a point and went too far.) Later on, my concept of "adequate" may be higher than today's. That may be the source of future discontent, not envy.

If your hypothetical brain surgeon maintains a lifestyle that he's happy with on 50K, then anything over that is pure gravy, for him. It should not make him unhappy that someone else makes more. If he really wanted to make more, then he can compete for a job that pays more, but he isn't morally obligated to do so, in terms of "upholding the profession" or some such nonsense. Granted, I wouldn't be satisfied with 50K, or more specifically the lifestyle afforded by that amount, but if someone else is, who am I to tell him he's unhappy, or should be unhappy, and doesn't know it?

But I agree with you that management has done right by us so far, and I have some patience to wait and see if they do the right thing and bring our hourly pay closer to industry standard (I use SWA as the benchmark) in the short term. After all, we're making record profits right? Time to share the wealth, that's all I'm saying...

Hah! Disagree strongly. Why should they? Didn't you sign a contract? Didn't you already get a unilateral raise? And aren't you already getting your pro-rata share of the profits? Why is your labor suddenly worth more than before on an hourly basis, just because the business plan works, or because someone else gets more (while his airline crumbles around him)?

Sure, I'd like to be paid more, and I too figure that if SWA can afford to pay that much more than we are and still remain profitable, then probably JetBlue can too. I'd happily take it, and count it as gravy. And I'd probably expand my notion of "adequate" to accommodate it. But I'm not entitled to it, on the basis of "spreading the wealth". (That's the kind of thinking that got United's pilots in such trouble). If the company decides to pay us better, as a means of limiting discontent, retaining pilots and keeping faith, then that's a great reason to do so. But we have no right to demand it.

On the other hand, if the current pay scale continues on in the future without change for a long period of time, with continued "record profits", then I would start feeling taken advantage of. I'm not sure at what point this would happen, but it's not imminent. We're too well taken care of in other ways. JetBlue management would have to burn through a lot of goodwill capital with me before reaching that point.

I wasn't knocking our profit sharing, it is a very nice supplement to our retirement package. I just wanted to clear something up - some guys were posting that JetBlue captains don't need a raise cause we get lots of profit sharing. I thought that might lead some to conclude that our profit sharing is SPENDABLE, just like hourly pay you get in the form of a paycheck is spendable.

Agreed. I had a problem with this interpretation too. But this notion that we're really paid better (or don't "need" a raise) because of profit sharing is often a defensive reaction: "See, we're not paid so bad, we've got profit sharing!" We are not paid on the same level as major airline, but you know, that's not cause for a defensive reaction.

And as far as saying you can't lose it....well, yes you can. Depends on how your investments do....the past three years have made painfully obvious the fact that stocks go down as well as up.

I worded it badly. I should have said that it can't be taken from you. And over time, stocks don't lose money. If you aren't brave enough to retest that theory, then put it in a money market fund, where it certainly won't lose money, but won't gain much either. That remains where it should: as an individual choice.

And finally, Blue Dude said:
"OK, Kid, I wouldn't dream of speaking for you, especially since it appears you're not even a JetBlue pilot."


Blue Dude,
WRONG

Then I'm wrong. Sorry about that. But you've got to admit, they made a pretty good case, using your own words.

Added in edit: I just read your reply to dgs. Makes sense to me. Sorry again.

 

[dgs]

Kid -- I removed the words because you found them inflamatory. I'm not here to flame anyone. My point was simply that people should not misrepresent who they are, who they work for, or what they fly. People just need to be honest about who they are if this forum is to have any credibility at all. These forums are certainly for the free exchange of ideas and I do not mean to chill that in any way. -- dgs

 

[JayDub]

Re: To Jay Dub

I really don't care what JB does any more than the other LCC's it's just that was the topic of this post.Any of the others I'd done the same thing.

Retirement as far as profit sharing goes,I didn't know you couldn't it get until retirement oh oh oh.Hopes it protected somehow or that might be bad news down the road.

Hey!!! How'd I get drug into this? I was minding my own bidnizz.

Before I return to the sidelines on this one, I have one question for you Intruder. Why don't you look at what it says on your company ID before you slam Mesa and those that work there? If you were so incensed at the P.O.S. contract, why'd you return to work under it?

JayDub

 

[hngryflyr]

Ha ha. Pay discussions always get me a little fired up too folks. Question: As an employee who CHOSE to work here, (employee and chose...the key words) I wonder are we entitled to anything? What are we obligated to receive as compensation and who can be ultimately responsible for determining those numbers? One would argue that while you are still an employee you really don't have any say in the matter. You did your research, applied, were extremely fortunate to be offered a position, everything is great. You made a choice, and accepted the offer. Some of us work for a while and settle in...and now its time to start wanting. Meanwhile along come big profits and with that some of us get greedy and the attitude that we are entitled to some of that. The trend has been to unionize to get what we want. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it really goes south. Are we not witnessing both sides right now? Those were good years "just the other day". We invented ways to be compensated...there was a boatload of cash! More recently...that was an absolute industry disaster! It wasn't caused by sky-high compensation packages...but those same cushy wages and nice work rules did play a role. Do we really need over $300 an hour to do this? Should I not be working more than an average of 50 hours if I am getting compensated for 75? On and on... While disaster was looming up over the horizon, some of us were laughing all the way to the bank. But I wasn't laughing in that fxxxing unemployment line. Of course, I would love to cash those kind of checks, but not if it means I help the bankruptcy process along, or my furlough date. Pretty easy to figure, I need the company to survive to sign those checks...right? And back to my original point...I trust my management (so far so good) who makes those compensation decisions, who offered me employment and I CHOSE to accept...I trust they will make the correct decision for the good of us all. Both sides, if you still think we are on different sides. JB (and whoever else has the same plan...I don't know) might really have something here. This might be the new way to do business...we are on uncharted territory now folks. It was never this bad...the perfect storm...and if you are sitting around waiting for this to return to "normal" you may wait all the way to the rocker. And if I want to be determining the size of my own check...then I should stop being an employee and become the employer.
No I'm not settling for anything...I am being realistic in our current economic state. Its 2003, the shxt hit the fan, I'm employed, receiving a good compensation, I really have nothing to bxxch about. And if you CHOOSE to be an employee...neither do you right now. We are on precarious ground here folks...just look at the last decade if you want a "who would've thunk it". If some of you haven't noticed there are how many of us on the street? I think we might consider ourselves lucky to be cashing a check period. I will be last in line to go off half cocked and leading the charge for a bigger one right now! But that's my opinion...

 

[Skank]

Kid,
Furloughed from....?

I'll guess. U.S. Air.

 

[Eagleflip]

Moderator Input

A few simple rules, folks:

--No one (except the super moderator) will use this forum to find out the identity of other posters.

--Posters can say what they want within the guidelines of the published forum policy.

--Anyone who misidentifies themself or misconstrues their position leave themselves open to scathing attacks and ridicule from their forum neighbors.

 

[NYRANGERS]

Re: Re: Response to Blue Dude

No, no, no, I said nothing about being paid according to my "need", whatever that is. I meant that the pay is adequate for me, to maintain the lifestyle I want. It is "adequate" in the sense that it is enough for what I want in life, and therefore that's good enough. Comparing my pay to others' to determine whether I ought to be satisfied with the lifestyle my pay provides for me is groupthink, penis envy, and worse.

I hope you can see some danger in this approach. I am sure you are happy with your compensation package, but I feel the only way for you to keep your compensation package is to adhear to "industry standards".

Obviously you and I have a very different idea of what "adequate" is. However I want to see you and all pilots KEEP what they feel is adequate. Some people at JB may feel adequate for them is less than what it is for you, this may effect your future compensation package and lifestyle.

Just some thoughts, I could be wrong, I could be right.

Respectfully,

NYR

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Nice post Mo' Better Blues

Mo,

I agree with everything you just said....except the part where you say you are sure you speak for the majority. It seems this is a common refrain, no matter what somebody says they always claim to speak for everyone else...

Why not just speak for yourself? Say how you feel and let everyone else speak for himself. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion no matter how many (or few) others may endorse it. And anyway, short of hiring a polling firm to conduct a scientific poll, you have no way of knowing how many others agree with you anyway.

Just my 2 cents........ Happy landings.

 

[Intruder One]

To Blue Dude:

Hope you know more about flying than you do the stock market"In time stocks don't loose money"I can see by that statment you are very naive.Enron,global crossing,usairways,all gone,companys are still there but stock is gone.I guess discussing the business side of a company with you is pointless.I guess I should keep JB forever because it could never loose money.

 

[VMA214]

Just a question for you JB guys. Who and when do "they" determine any "new" pay rates for you guys? FWIW I have been telling any copilot I've been flying with who's about to be furloughed to get an application in with JB yesterday!

After lurking in this thread since it started I can understand some of the "altruistic" attitudes you guys have towards management and I agree that it appears to have worked well so far. But, human nature being what it is, and this is my personal opinion, those in the head shed will eventually begin to "see" more and more of the pie as belonging to themselves. I know that flys in the face somewhat with SWA but even those guys have a union. Then again, as NY Rangers says...I could be wrong...

 

[Blue Dude]

Re: To Blue Dude:

Hope you know more about flying than you do the stock market"In time stocks don't loose money"I can see by that statment you are very naive.Enron,global crossing,usairways,all gone,companys are still there but stock is gone.I guess discussing the business side of a company with you is pointless.I guess I should keep JB forever because it could never loose money.

I was referring to the stock market as a whole, not individual stocks. In the long term, the stock market doesn't lose money, at least it never has so far. Individual stocks may, but the market as a whole does not. A properly diversified stock fund is all but guaranteed to do better over the long run than a safe money market fund, but everyone has a different tolerance for risk. Don't worry about me, I can take care of my own retirement planning, thank you.

I notice that you carefully avoid the meat of the discussion only to nitpick on the fringes. A sure sign you've run out of constructive comments. Go back under your rock.