jetblue EMB-190 pay??!!!

[G4G5]

Lowcur,


Now this will really put pressure on WN. The 190 will absolutely destroy WN when B6 begins to match up on routes in probably 2007. This plane will be used against WN out west between OAK and LAS at first, and they will spider web the routes out of LAS as they grow. These routes will also put tremendous pressure on AWA's bid to survive.

It's gonna be a great future for Embraer. [/QUOTE]
Lowcur,

I think that you are a liitle off base here. The mgt of LUV has already looked at the 190RJ issue and they have decided that at this point it makes little sence(but they did leave the backdoor open). The 190 is a new airframe and a new motor combination. LUV has no intension of becoming the guinea pig. It's just not worth it for them.

How did B6 do the last time they tried a West coast fare war? Did you notice that LUV has a sale going on
http://www.southwest.com/jp/hotfares.shtml?src=PR%5fsale%5f070604

How much yeild is Jetblue going to make on the 190 when they are filling seats at $39 going againsta full SWA 737 at $39. This sounds to me like the stupidest thing that they could do with the 190.

The 737 still has tremendous adventages over the 190. Their is no cheaper commercial aircraft in the world to do maintenance on. Due to the large numbers of 737's flying the economies of scale create huge pricing pressure on aircraft parts and supplies. Sure the 190 will be under warranty but how long will it take to get a spares supply built up around the country (like the 737). What about the earning curve associated with the introduction of a second type. How many Certified Repair stations at various airports around the country are going to have trained maint techs who can repair the 190? This is not Boeing tech support, no it's 1800 call the jungle to see if they have the spare. I could go on and on. It's extremely clear that LUV has done the research and decided that this is not a good idea (for them).

An engine overhaul, brakes, rotables and spares will be cheaper on the 737 for years to come. Training costs for a single type are lower, LUV pilots come with their 737 types. LUV still can leverage fuel contracts better then anyone in the industry. Flying one type still makes more sence. At a time when USAir and the other majors are ripe for the picking LUV has placed their largest 737 orders. What had B6 done? Gone after the smaller 190 market. Where is the higher yeild? Attacking USAir in PHL or starting a west coast fare war?

 

[G4G5]

What will be interesting is how DL, AMR, and SWA will handle this? Arpy and Greenjeans have been waiting to see what B6 will do, and now they will be able to sit down with the pilot groups and see who will fly the 190. My guess is the rates for both DL and AMR will be about 10% higher than B6. I believe the plane will be flown by mainline in both cases. They don't have a choice in the matter, they will have to buy the plane and fly it cheaply.

I believe that you hit the nail on the head. AMR will no doubt enter the 190 game. It's quite clear that they need a replacement for the Foker. By this time next year AMR will only have 30 CRJ700's, that's only 30 aircraft to fill the gap between 50 and 119 seats.

Dave and his boy's in an effort to be CHEAP may have just put the nail in their coffin. The rates they have established will no doubt set the presedence for the industry. When Arpey comes calling to Hunter he will get the pay rates he wants. For those of you who don't know, Hunter is the new APA President that has already signaled that he is willing to cave in on the 190 and the pay rates. Just ask any AA pilot. If Hunnibel had been elected I would feel different but he was not and Hunter was. The bottom line is someone at AA will be willing to fly the 190 for those rates, (the same thing will no doubt happen at DAL).

AMR mgt is licking their chops at the very thought of being able to fly coast to coast in a 190 at the Jet Blue rates. Consider this the 190 holds 115 seats. AMR MD80's hold 119 seats. AMR has approx 325 MD80's. Can anyone else think of a better replacement? How many additional aircraft will be needed to fill the void created by the retirement of the 74-F100's? See my point Dave has just invited a whirlwind of competition in the 190 market with those rates. If he had set them at $5-10 dollars below current market 717, DC9, MD80 rates he would have been able to flood the market with the 190's and no one woul have cared. These rates will make the majors stand up and take notice.

AMR is in a far better position the Jetblue to get the 190's at sub par rates. Sure Dave can jump and down and say he got them for cheaper. The reality is Embraer knows where their bread is buttered. How long has AMR been purchasing Embraer products? When Embraer's largest customer comes calling with a 300-400 aircraft order, economies of scale will dictate that AMR gets the best price. FYI the last time I checked AMR had over $3.5 BILLION in cash.

The reality is that AMR could have done this with the 717 but they would have had to pay the current contract 717 wages. Their are no contract pay rates for the 190. Which means they have to be negotiated. Dave has just set the pay rate so low that when Arpey sits down with the APA, what leg do they have to stand on?

This will also be an easy sell to the current pilots. It will never effect them. Anyone know how many AA pilots retire within the next 10 years? Over 3,500!!
Approximatly the same number of MD80 pilots that AMR has. Arpey can eaisly sell it to the union. He can replace the MD80's with 190's at the same rate of pilot retirements. The current MD80 pilots will fill the void creatd by the retiring pilots, never having to fly the 190. The furloughed pilots get recalled into the 190. Arpey can get preff bidding whatever he wants. In exchange for a slight pay raise on the larger equipment. The money saved by replacing the MD80 pay rates with Jetblue 190 pay rates will eaisly cover this. This will pass with little objection because the current AA pilots will never be effected by this, they will still move up and get a raise. The 3500 retiring will no doubt want 2500+ dues payers back on the real estate. They will also be happy to be getting a pay raise.

That' what I ment about the nail in the coffin. The 800 pound guerilla has just been invited to the dance.

 

[8vATE]

+++++++++++++
As for my solution, it is quite simple and quite obvious........do the right thing and pay our EMB pilots a decent wage!

++++++++++++

I can certainly agree to that....

Emotions around the board are very high... There are a lot of upset people.
I came through the commuters, major airline freight, major airline furlough..
I have empathy for those that are upset....I have friends at the regionals, at cargo carriers and furloughed...

Everyone is upset that the 100 seat EMB rates are low...
No disagreement from me... But everyone forgets that the 156 seat A320 rates are low... And those of us that accepted employment at B6 knew that..

Hopefully, the additional compensation of profitsharing and CSSP and stock options make up some for that... And the job security and the way we are treated by our leadership.

This industry is in upheaval.... I'm amazed that according to the financial experts the airline industry has lost more than it has earned in its entire history...

Some people seem to forget that jetBlue IS in fact an LCC..
We are not paying industry leading payrates... and we are not even paying industry average rates for 100 seaters.....

Hopefully things will improve... for everyone...
eventually..

 

[SpeedBird]

180+ posts and everyone has whipped this issue into a nice frothy lather of emotional extremes and knee-jerk assumptions about the motives of David & Dave, jetBlue pilots, and either the shared or individual culpability to the shock of the EMB-190 rates and its supposed impact on the industry going forward.

I think everyone (most especially every jetBlue pilot) should take a step back from the issue, take a deep breath, and let things develop internally at jetBlue under its own course. There is still a lot of time to properly handle this issue without going off the deep end here and do something really stupid, especially on the ill-advised inputs of some folks here who have absolutely no stake in our future. This is an issue to be resolved between the jetBlue pilots and management, and ONLY jetBlue pilots and management.

Tony your comments serve no useful purpose at this point since you don't have a horse in this race. The only thing you share with jetBlue pilots is the same the airspace our airplanes fly in and that's it. BTW it's Mr. "Neeleman" unless you think you're being witty with that overdone "Needleman" thing. I expect better from you based on your overall postings on this forum.

JetBlue pilots: Before you think David & Dave is unilaterally going to take away your next born from under your noses let's give them the benefit of the doubt that they may have made a couple of bad assumptions and are willing to listen to our concerns about some of the unintended consequences of this announcement.

Let us BKADers not forget that the competition is pulling out all the stops to try and put this young airline out of business...and nothing less. To believe otherwise is just wishful thinking. Now thanks to the astute business plan designed and executed by, and the nimbleness to adjust this plan to the external threats of the competition, David and Dave have done nothing short of amazing to keep the wheels on the wagon. Yes, the airline has maintained a respectable level of profitability and has grown at a healthy clip while most others have lost copious amounts of money and significantly reduced pilot numbers. HOWEVER, I believe the next 24 months will be crucial to the long-term success of failure of this airline.

JetBlue is now on the threshold of moving away from a start-up national airline to a major airline this year. While that may seem like good news on first pass, it comes with many new extra costs to the airline; costs like building expensive new infrastructure (like jetBlue U, mx support hangars, sim training facilitities, and the new JFK terminal); the EMB-190 will be brought on board, and the airline will have to deal with possibly several operational/training/maintenance issues as a result; finally the airline is squarely in the competitive bulleye of just about every major legacy carrier and this has reduced margins and yields at a time when jetBlue (and everyone else) cannot raise fares. The only way to maintain profitability is keep the delta (spread) between CASM and RPMs as large as possible. This is what has carried jetBlue this far in this business, and this is what will keep it one step head of the competition going forward for at least the next few years. I am sure this is what David & Dave are pre-occupied with and what may have served as a basis for establishing the EMB-190 rates.

Now with that said, the old saying that a "good defense is a good offense" also applies here. I expect that the EMB-190 will be used as a big club by David & Dave going into the next round of the LCC vs Legacy bout. Right now (on the domestic front) the smaller regional markets have been largely ignored by the LCCs, and as a result has given legacy carriers some financial breathing room while hemorrhaging in the more competitive LCC battleground markets. While we pilots look at the EMB-190 payrates in a certain light (i.e., bringing down the pay and QOL of pilots throughout the business), I'll bet David & Dave based rates with an offensive mind-set on how to kick the competiton's rump. By using similar payrates on the 100-seat 190 that are used for 50-70 seat aircraft, this will allow the labor costs to be zeroied out between the EMB-190 and the aircraft it will compete with (not other 100 seat aircraft but CRJs and other 50-70 regional aircraft).

JetBlue will have have a CASM advantage of at least 50% over its competition and this will have as big or bigger impact on its bottom-line as it did during 2002 & 2003 with the A320s (lower prices and better service). I believe that unlike the A320 market yields in this new market will be better than we've had historically with the Airbii. The other difference is that this market segment is four or five times larger than the one the A320s operate in. If this works it should create a significant financial windfall for the airline, the shareholders, and the employees for several more years.

Okay, so what should the jetBlue pilots be doing now. I think we need to be talking in a more organized and thoughtful manner, and more importantly talking with management in the same way and letting them know how we initially view these new payrates. Then let's us shut-up for a minute and listen to their response. I believe there is a fruitful middleground between managing growing costs in a cut-throat operating environment and letting jetBlue go after the juglar of the competiton (I believe it will be found with the improved yield environment using 190s). If a union or other organized entity must come from this process then so be it, but let's not get our collective panties in a wad because everyone else outside of our little ol airline is crying that the sky is falling and that we're responsible for their emotional insecurities.

To put in pilot terms we can all appreciate; let's just hack the clock and smoke our figurative pipes now that the master-caution light has illuminated....cause the "airplane" isn't gonna fall out of the sky in the next five minutes.

****edited to remove excessive profanity****

 

[bayoubandit]

G4G5 is right on

The deal will be struck to bring back the furloughed guys, at least that is the way they will make it look. A win for Hunter & co in their minds!!!

APA will have no choice in accepting these rates or else a way will be found to farm out the 100 seat flying. I never doubted that APA would have to settle for less than F100 rates on the E Jet if they want to preserve jobs, but I don't think that is their interest anyhow.

I wonder in the case AMR does take on the the E Jets, how junior will Cpt. go. I can't imagine any one on bigger equipment upgrading for a paycut.

 

[blahshmah]

I nominate Speedbird to go talk to David & Dave, good luck!

 

[catIIIc]

G4G5,, Bayou Bandit,


While I agree that we will not be flying the new E-Jets at Fokker rates I do not believe that we will fly them at the low Jet Blue rates. I may be overly optumistic but look at the eagle 70 seat rates they are pretty close to the Jet Blue rates.

Anyway if they do fly them at Jet Blue rates their still will not be any recalls because as guys retire they will just park that many MD80's and replace with E190's: displace and bump no recalls.

Happy days
CatIIIc

 

[G4G5]

G4G5,, Bayou Bandit,


While I agree that we will not be flying the new E-Jets at Fokker rates I do not believe that we will fly them at the low Jet Blue rates. I may be overly optumistic but look at the eagle 70 seat rates they are pretty close to the Jet Blue rates.

Anyway if they do fly them at Jet Blue rates their still will not be any recalls because as guys retire they will just park that many MD80's and replace with E190's: displace and bump no recalls.

Happy days
CatIIIc

How do you figure no recalls? If an equal number of 190's replace the retirig MD80s (some over 20 years old) and AA retires 3500 pilots the replacements have to come from somewhere.

I am not saying that the rates will be as pathetic as JetBules. AA has always maintained that they can justify 15-30% premium in their pricing. I would no doubt think that AA rates will be 15-30% better. This is still quite a savings for Arpey and gang over the existing F100/MD80 rates.

Does anyone know how to edit a post. I have been in Africa on a 2 week trip and my clock is a bit off (so in my spelling, the key boards in Mauritius are quite different). The edit function is not on any of my previous posts.

 

[bayoubandit]

CatIIIc

You must be having a blond moment? I guess the humidity has clogged yo brain I would also think we would get better than the JB rates if they get them. Time will tell.

I would think there would be recalls also if the fleet size remains the same. Weren't you telling me it won't be too much longer.

In the mean time, we're living the dream!

Bayou

Ps. G4, I think I read on hear that you can't edit a post after 10 minutes due to the the new format or something of that nature.

 

[catIIIc]

My bad I guess I was figuring if eagle gets the 190, I think if we see any growth at all next year it will be for China and the 26 MD80's coming out of the desert.


I hope something big happens soon I am going deaf and sweating more then any human should down here.

Take CAAre
CatIIIc

 

[skirt]

To put in pilot terms we can all appreciate; let's just hack the clock and smoke our figurative pipes now that the master-caution light has illuminated....cause the "airplane" isn't gonna fall out of the sky in the next five minutes.

Speedbird, very well said. I have been mulling over this for the last 48 hours. Its important for everyone to relax, take a deep breath and have good solid dialog within the company, without jumping to conclusions about intentions or futures. I've worked in environments where the partial story is taken as the full story and dander flies without solid discussion, chest beating replaces mature thinking and nobody wins. Not good.

Having said this, I do think it is important to ask the hard questions and listen to the answers. So far, this process is still too much in its infancy to go off the deep end with wild reactions. Lets discuss this internally like the professionals that we are. David and Dave get out in the field far more than most leaders, so it is easy to have these discussions openly.

Skirt

 

[G4G5]

It took a little over a year of existence here at JetBlue to get a 32% raise DURING the middle of my contract. Starting pay for a 1st year captain was $78/hour for the A-320 four years ago. Listen, the 190 is still over a year away, they had to publish a list, so there you have it. I'm going on my fourth year here and as a captain made over 160,000 last year, without including profit sharing! It's not 300 grand, but it pays for the house, wife and kids... So I don't have a summer home or I don't get to send the kids to a private school. At least I'm not selling insurance. It ticks me off when you try to compare 717 rates at AAI with ours, do they get paid time/half for their overtime? Didn't think so... I got paid 70 grand with 11 years in the air force-- risked my life for a weed inhaling, lying sex feind of a democrat, was that worth it? I'll take my lifestyle here any day, and if you don't want to work here, then please, don't apply here and waste our time!

According to airlinepilotpay.com 4th year Jetblue pay rate is $118 an hour.

$118x70 hrs a month = $99,120.00
If you made over $160k then you made $61k in overtime.
Overtime pay is 118/2=59, 59+118=$177.00 an hour.
$61,000 / $177.00 = 344 hours of overtime flown in a year.
344 /12 months = 28 hours a month of overtime.
28 + the original 70 = 98 hours of flying a month !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are not going to find any sympathy from the younger Jetblue folks. How many of them have the ability to create a monthly line of time consistantly for a year that allows them to fly 98 hours a month. How many of them want to fly the FAA allowable annual max consistantly for the rest of their careers?

Considering that most B6 pilots are commuters, what kind of quality of life does a 98 hour a month commuter have? Do you actually expect pilots to fly the 190 for 98 hours a month just to make ends meet?

Who hear thinks that 15% profit sharing is consistantly obtainable.

Thanks for the edit tip, 10 minutes only

 

[Truckdriver]

Problem with this statement is we don't have any say in the matter. We, as a pilot group don't have a say as to whether we "accept" the pay or not. The only way we don't accept the pay is if we quit. Mgmt tells us what we're going to be paid, they don't negotiate.

I like this guy. AAFlyer also has a clue as to how this industry operates. It sounds like some people over there may be in the works of organizing a union campaign. You can't bash the JBLU pilots until they have shown that they are in favor of what is going on there. Like Heywood said, they had NO say in this matter. We can only bash them when they continutally vote against unionizing. I think the guys at JBLU will get it right.

Like I said earlier, these pay rates are a direct result of the low rates that SKYW has put on paper. Neelman saw what the SKYW guys were going to fly aircraft for and he based his rates on what those rates were. If you want to bash someone for the rates at JBLU lets bash the premeir non-union carrier in this industry and that is SKYW. They have voted against unionizing time and time again. The last time I think less than a third of the pilots voted for a union. The pilot group at SKYW has shown the rest of us that they are not with us as pilots in this profession. I think just as highly of a SKYW pilot as I do of a Freedom pilot.

 

[80drvr]

According to airlinepilotpay.com 4th year Jetblue pay rate is $118 an hour.

$118x70 hrs a month = $99,120.00
If you made over $160k then you made $61k in overtime.
Overtime pay is 118/2=59, 59+118=$177.00 an hour.
$61,000 / $177.00 = 344 hours of overtime flown in a year.
344 /12 months = 28 hours a month of overtime.
28 + the original 70 = 98 hours of flying a month !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are not going to find any sympathy from the younger Jetblue folks. How many of them have the ability to create a monthly line of time consistantly for a year that allows them to fly 98 hours a month. How many of them want to fly the FAA allowable annual max consistantly for the rest of their careers?

Considering that most B6 pilots are commuters, what kind of quality of life does a 98 hour a month commuter have? Do you actually expect pilots to fly the 190 for 98 hours a month just to make ends meet?

Who hear thinks that 15% profit sharing is consistantly obtainable.

Thanks for the edit tip, 10 minutes only

G4G5, my thoughts exactly on the 160k/year. Is that a sustainable QOL?

 

[Ace757]

OK, all this complainin' and no one has stated what WOULD be a "fair" scale. If you look at other majors, the differential between a 5-yr capt on the biggest to smallest equipment usually falls at between 70-75%. At Independence, the diff (b/w 'bus and CRJ) is 51%. JetBlue stands at 63.6%, midrange within the industry like always (in regards to compensation). So, what does everyone expect? Another $8-10/hr? Someone post a revised 190 scale that would be "adequate", PLEASE! I'm really curious!!!

I think that the Airtran 717 payscale would be a good place to start with the EMB-190. Its definatly a good comparison in the 100 seat market. And if the cost competitivness of the EMB-190 beats all other carriers by 30% like some have said on this thread, then B6 should have no problem matching the pay, and still undercutting a LLC such as Airtran. Its definatly thr right thing to do

http://www.airlinepilotpay.com/airtran/airtran.htm

 

[MW44]

Truckdriver,

I don't see how you can compare JBlue's wages with those at Skywest. You are comparing a good mainline carrier compensation package with an entry level regional job. I don't see NWA demanding that their DC-9 pilots make wages comparable to Mesa CRJ-900 payrates. It looks like David sees airline pilots as "blue collar" workers who should be happy to make less money than the city's busdrivers.

 

[TonyC]

TonyC,

We're no different than any other professional pilot out there. We want to fly great airplanes, we want great work rules with competitive pay and spend a lot of time at home with our families. So Tony, before you go looking down your nose, shaking your head like a condescending father, realize that there is a lot of crap going on behind the scenes that you have no idea about.

Well, I wasn't looking down my nose at you, I wasn't shaking my head, and I don't use the condescending approach with my children. If you FELT that, perhaps it's of your own creation. I was simply pointing out the CONTRAST that exists in the way I've seen JetBlue management described in THIS thread and the way we've seen JetBlue management WORSHIPPED in all other threads. In every other aspect that I've seen discussed, whether it be cleaning airplanes so they can turn in 25 minutes or asking the FAA for an extension to the duty limits so you can be home at the end of a long day or choosing a base, or training, or hiring practices, or... well, you name the issue... management got it right, and "WE" are all in it together. NOW, all of a sudden, management is THEY. THEY did it, THEY didn't ask US, WE didn't get a say in it, THEY'll get the message from US eventually... surely you can see the difference, can't you?

I don't think you can have it both ways. If it's WE, WE, WE in every other aspect, then it should be "WE" in this one as well. I'd just like to see someone of the Color Blue to stand up and say "WE have announced EMB-190 rates that should embarrass the professional pilot."

You say you're like every other pilot - you want to fly great airplanes, you want great work rules and pay rates, you want to be home with your family every night (wait, you wanna be a pilot!?!?) - - but, in fact, you are different in a very fundamental way. You, as a group, have been looking down your collective noses at the majority of the industry and have defended the process under which your pay and work rules have been dictated. You have told us how much better it is to NOT have the adversarial relationship required by a Union. In fact, you are all EXPERTS in the folly of unions (even though the majority of you have never been IN one - - I was in the same shoes once upon a time, so I can empathize, really). You have sneered at us because you've got it so much better. Fine. Now, stop the blatant disingenuity and claim responsibility for the pay rates, too.

Tony your comments serve no useful purpose at this point since you don't have a horse in this race. The only thing you share with jetBlue pilots is the same the airspace our airplanes fly in and that's it. BTW it's Mr. "Neeleman" unless you think you're being witty with that overdone "Needleman" thing. I expect better from you based on your overall postings on this forum.

What? Because I'm not a JetBlue pilot I can't comment? Well, I guess we should all just go away and let the JetBlue pilots have their own little private conversation, huh? Don't be so asinine.

My horse in the race is a career in the aviation industry. What people have been trying to tell you all along is that what you do at JetBlue affects the entire rest of the industry. Do you not think that any other airline will look to the rates JetBlue pays EMB-190 pilots when they seek to lower the rates they pay their own pilots. You've as much as admitted the phenomenon when you rationalized the low rates.

By using similar payrates on the 100-seat 190 that are used for 50-70 seat aircraft, this will allow the labor costs to be zeroied out between the EMB-190 and the aircraft it will compete with (not other 100 seat aircraft but CRJs and other 50-70 regional aircraft).

See there. Even you realize that your company is, to borrow the cliche, NOT an island. You are affected by other airlines, and you affect other airlines. (By the way, it's "zeroed.") Indeed, we share much more than just airspace. If you haven't figured out THAT concept, then I strongly disagree with blahshmah's nomination to have you speak with "David and Dave."

Which brings me to the next point. Not enjoying the same familiarity with your management types, I don't feel as comfortable using given names as surnames. I did not intend to misspell Mr. Neeleman's name, nor did I intend to use it as a witticism. After posting, I looked back through the thread to see if I could find the last name used by a reliable JetBlue poster. The most common spelling I found included the "d" so I left it at that. Even so, I attempted to include a comment indicating I was unsure of the spelling, and to apologize in advance. Alas, the 10 minute limit had expired. I humbly apologize for making the mistake, and I hope you are not so offended by the honest mistake that you've missed the message. (You'll have to admit, Neeleman is slightly easier to misspell than Smith. )

Now, back to the quote I've already mentioned... Once more, for clarity:

I'll bet David & Dave based rates with an offensive mind-set on how to kick the competiton's rump. By using similar payrates on the 100-seat 190 that are used for 50-70 seat aircraft, this will allow the labor costs to be zeroied out between the EMB-190 and the aircraft it will compete with (not other 100 seat aircraft but CRJs and other 50-70 regional aircraft).

I don't have time to offer a complete tutorial on the history of the airline industry, or even the aspect of pilots' compensation. Let me just ask you one question: If this mindset had been employed when developing pay rates for the 707 when it was first introduced, how do you think pilots would be paid today? If the primary consideration had been, "Let's pay the pilots the same as pilots on those smaller, slower, propellor-driven things the other guys are flying so we won't be at a labor cost disadvantage," how do you suppose you and I would be paid today? If the goal was, as you say, to pay the 50-70 seat rate on the 100-seat jet, so you could compete, then you're missing a huge piece of the economic picture. NO, 707 pilots came to be paid much more than their predecessoras because they were FAR MORE PRODUCTIVE.

And that brings us to a fundamental that has been used in the industry to determine pilot wages: Pilots should be paid relative to the profit that they bring to the company. If they fly a small airplane that brings little revenue, they should not expect to be paid like a pilot that flies a big, fast airplane that brings 50 times the profit. Likewise, a pilot that flies 100 passengers from point A to point B at a given profit margin should expect to be paid MORE THAN a pilot who flies half as many passengers along the same route, even in the unlikely scenario where the profit on each passenger is the same.

Now, I understand that it's only a fundamental principle, and not a rule. Some carriers elect to pay the same for all equipment (UPS immeidately comes to mind) and many other economies emerge (training costs are reduced) or benefits appear (a pilot can be content to fly smaller equipment at the universal pay rate as long as he can live in his hometown, etc.). But the principle remains unchanged. You apparently want to ignore that principle in favor of the COMPANY's goal of making money. NOT pilots making money, but the COMPANY. Well, fine. Then take the "offensive mind-set on how to kick the competiton's rump" one step further and volunteer to fly your Airbus for the published EMB-190 rates. Then I'll know you're truly a man of principles. Otherwise, I'll see that you're simply trying to justify your management's attempt to bring down the pay scale of pilots throughout the industry -- the industry that you share (in addition to airspace) with me.

 

[MW44]

Tony,

Very well put!

 

[TonyC]

You can't bash the JBLU pilots until they have shown that they are in favor of what is going on there. Like Heywood said, they had NO say in this matter. We can only bash them when they continutally vote against unionizing. I think the guys at JBLU will get it right.

My criticism focuses on the disingenuous way in which the pilots can now conveniently disassociate themselves from management, when in all other instances they proclaim the superiority of their team mentality.

They don't have to VOTE against unionizing to show their colors; they have openly bashed unions and the "adversarial" relationship which they KNOW it will bring. Either it's WE all the way, or it's US vs THEM. Pick a story, and stick to it.

As long as they sing WE, WE, WE, they share responsibility.

When they realize it's US versus THEM, then they'll realize there's no strong voice for "US" and it's already an adversarial relationship.

Their hands are not clean.

 

[skirt]

And that brings us to a fundamental that has been used in the industry to determine pilot wages: Pilots should be paid relative to the profit that they bring to the company. If they fly a small airplane that brings little revenue, they should not expect to be paid like a pilot that flies a big, fast airplane that brings 50 times the profit. Likewise, a pilot that flies 100 passengers from point A to point B at a given profit margin should expect to be paid MORE THAN a pilot who flies half as many passengers along the same route, even in the unlikely scenario where the profit on each passenger is the same.

Whether right or wrong, it appears to me that this principle was indeed applied in the EMB-190 payscale compared to the A-320 payscale at JetBlue. The Airbus has 156 seats and the EMB has 100 seats. The EMB pay is very close to 100/156th (2/3) of the A320 pay (however, its interesting to note that the EMB pilot is not working 2/3rds as hard as a A320 pilot).


Skirt