No soup for you....says JetBlue....

[Smarta$$]

http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/legacy/united.html

Not an override dumba$$

"do" not "due" btw...

Did you really just post a link to a company that pays the same rate for the 320 and 321?

 

[coogebeachhotel]

Did you really just post a link to a company that pays the same rate for the 320 and 321?

I did. Read. You see anything else?

 

[Smarta$$]

You said we are mostly matched with Alaska and SWA correct?

Each has language to open up a portion of the contract for what when a new aircraft is added?

You lack the context behind the results and that is simply why you are ignorant.

Go back to dropping f bombs instead of your mythical facts it was entertaining.

Southwest only recently added the 737-800. Alaska recently added the 737-900. Guess what, same pay.

Man you are desperate.

 

[Smarta$$]

I did. Read. You see anything else?

Lots of things. And nothing that disproves anything I said previously, which would be impossible anyway given that you only included ONE airline. Wow, that surely demonstrates the entire industry.

 

[Blue Dude]

The peer set overrides for larger aircraft in the same family is almost an irrelevant comparison, because every one of those airlines had rates (or lack thereof) which were negotiated. Who knows what the pilots got from the company in exchange for a flat family rate? I sure don't. I do know for sure that we are giving the company a plane with both a CASM advantage and a revenue advantage over the A320, for nothing. We will have more work, more passenger issues, more responsibility, more delays, for no compensation at all. No trading for better compensation/work rules/benefits elsewhere, just more work for identical pay.

This pissing contest is disgraceful. Get over yourselves and focus on the real problem: no CBA.

 

[Smarta$$]

The peer set overrides for larger aircraft in the same family is almost an irrelevant comparison, because every one of those airlines had rates (or lack thereof) which were negotiated. Who knows what the pilots got from the company in exchange for a flat family rate? I sure don't. I do know for sure that we are giving the company a plane with both a CASM advantage and a revenue advantage over the A320, for nothing. We will have more work, more passenger issues, more responsibility, more delays, for no compensation at all. No trading for better compensation/work rules/benefits elsewhere, just more work for identical pay.

This pissing contest is disgraceful. Get over yourselves and focus on the real problem: no CBA.

I FULLY support using the argument that the additional revenue should be used in part for increasing the JB pilot comp package, just not a 321 only pay rate or 321 only override.

 

[coogebeachhotel]

Lots of things. And nothing that disproves anything I said previously, which would be impossible anyway given that you only included ONE airline. Wow, that surely demonstrates the entire industry.

Disproves nothing huh?

 

[Blue Dude]

I FULLY support using the argument that the additional revenue should be used in part for increasing the JB pilot comp package, just not a 321 only pay rate or 321 only override.

One way or another, a new addendum A will have to be signed before we operate the plane. The only people who have to sign it are pilots who will operate the A321. If you can think of a way to spread the wealth around to everyone, not just those who have to sign it, by all means use your direct relationship and fix this pending abortion while there is still time.

Not that it matters. Enough current A320 pilots will sign anything put in front of them to operate the A321 for no override, no benefit to any pilot. They simply want to avoid making waves/getting on someone's bad side/putting the company's bottom line at risk/etc/etc/etc. The company knows this, so rather than follow through with their own process and their own logic, they will assume quite rightly that they can talk out of both sides of their mouths and not be called on it. Lacking a CBA, we just have to take it.

 

[Smarta$$]

Disproves nothing huh?

Yes. You have a quote feature, I suggest you use it. Otherwise, get lost.

 

[Smarta$$]

One way or another, a new addendum A will have to be signed before we operate the plane. The only people who have to sign it are pilots who will operate the A321. If you can think of a way to spread the wealth around to everyone, not just those who have to sign it, by all means use your direct relationship and fix this pending abortion while there is still time.

Not that it matters. Enough current A320 pilots will sign anything put in front of them to operate the A321 for no override, no benefit to any pilot. They simply want to avoid making waves/getting on someone's bad side/putting the company's bottom line at risk/etc/etc/etc. The company knows this, so rather than follow through with their own process and their own logic, they will assume quite rightly that they can talk out of both sides of their mouths and not be called on it. Lacking a CBA, we just have to take it.

Interesting times ahead for JB pilots. I do not have a good feeling about it either.

 

[Fins Up]

"us" about 14% behind? NO, a small minority of pilots who fly the 321 or the small overall percentage of block hours flown on the 321 MIGHT be behind. But that assumes it is standard to pay more for a stretched COMMON type, which is NOT the case. And even if it were, it is far down on the priority list of things that need to be fixed around here. And even then, the extra revenue should be used to increase the rate for ALL 320 family pay, not just an override for a minority. No airline can be directly, perfectly compared to another, but we are FAR more similar to SW and AK than we are the big multi-multi-multi fleet legacies. They pay a single rate for stretched common types, that way the entire seniority list can benefit from the extra corporate revenue generated.

A "small overall percentage of block hours", has nothing to do with a weighted average of pilot compensation. The company chose to compare us for A321 pay to five or six airlines, only two of which acutally fly the A321. They said "only one" of the airlines pay the override when they certainly could have said 50% of the presented airlines that actually fly the 321 pay the override.

You're looking at it as a "similar type". A different, and I believe better, perspective is from a revenue standpoint - or even a liablity standpoint. You're now responsible for 40 more lives on your plane and your flying around 40 more seats worth of revenue. The only thing you get out of it is 40 more possiblities for a gate return.

If you want to stick with arguing that we're more like AK or WN, I won't argue with you. Maybe if we were anywhere near AK or WN in pay, or health insurance, or retirement, or profit-sharing, or vacation, this issue might not be such a big deal.

 

[Smarta$$]

A "small overall percentage of block hours", has nothing to do with a weighted average of pilot compensation. The company chose to compare us for A321 pay to five or six airlines, only two of which acutally fly the A321. They said "only one" of the airlines pay the override when they certainly could have said 50% of the presented airlines that actually fly the 321 pay the override.

You're looking at it as a "similar type". A different, and I believe better, perspective is from a revenue standpoint - or even a liablity standpoint. You're now responsible for 40 more lives on your plane and your flying around 40 more seats worth of revenue. The only thing you get out of it is 40 more possiblities for a gate return.

If you want to stick with arguing that we're more like AK or WN, I won't argue with you. Maybe if we were anywhere near AK or WN in pay, or health insurance, or retirement, or profit-sharing, or vacation, this issue might not be such a big deal.

Their is no reason to limit the discussion to the 321, which few companies operate. We have the 737 in our pay review process for a reason, and I am pretty sure you do NOT want to remove the 737 from our pay review process. The 737 is more common, and fills the same mission as the A320-321. It is most often paid as a single pay rate.

Either way, I have already said, many times, that I support increasing pilot compensation based on the additional revenue, just not as a 321 only pay rate or 321 only override.

Also, I have said our number ONE priority should be improving the rest of our contract to better align us with AK and WN's overall contract. That is far more important and beneficial to this group than a pay override for 30 airplanes.

 

[Smarta$$]

By the way, Delta pays LESS on the MD88-MD90 than they pay on the A320, A319, and 737-700, even though the MD88-MD90 have MORE seats.

Delta also pays the same rate for the 757 and 767. Not only does the 767 have more seats, but it is a WIDEBODY!

As I have said before, SOME PAY MORE FOR A STRETCHED COMMON TYPE, MANY/MOST DO NOT.

EITHER WAY, WE HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO FIX HERE AT BLUE.

 

[ROSWELL41]

So to recap, currently only Spirit and US Airways fly the A321 in the United States. Spirit pays a 10% override and US Airways pays the same as the A320?

 

[Splert]

Southwest only recently added the 737-800. Alaska recently added the 737-900. Guess what, same pay.

Man you are desperate.

The contract required negotiation.

Did swapa give back or get something for agreeing to operate the new aircraft.

Give us the context not the headline.

Come on stop acting like a kindergartener. What did swaps gain?

 

[Vingus]

The bottom line is this:

Jetblue pilots are undercompensated in multitudes of areas to include base pay, vacation, sick time, health insurance, and retirement.

This is another example of our ELT doing what they can (because we are non-union) to keep their costs down and not compensating us to the level they promised (industry average) five years ago.

Period. Dot.

 

[Dizel8]

I have no problem with 320/321 getting same pay, that is as long it it is at DAL, ALK,SWA rates.

 

[coogebeachhotel]

I don't give a crap about the company data on 321 pay. I have seen biased info and data from the PVC as well. I care about the totality of data, and it clearly shows no industry mandate for a separate pay rate for a stretched common type (A319-320-321, 737-700-800-900 etc...). Some due pay an override, more than half or even most

United and Delta both pay separate pay rates for different gauges of the same type. The two biggest airlines in the US. No mandate huh?

So you are wrong in your spewing.

Later....

 

[Smarta$$]

The contract required negotiation.

Did swapa give back or get something for agreeing to operate the new aircraft.

Give us the context not the headline.

Come on stop acting like a kindergartener. What did swaps gain?

Whatever it was, it was NOT a pay override or pay rate for just a small number of airplanes. Wow, what a coincidence, that is exactly what I have been suggesting.... Improve our OVERALL comp package, not just a pay raise for small group of pilots....

Your arguments have been an epic failure, how embarrassing.

 

[Smarta$$]

I have no problem with 320/321 getting same pay, that is as long it it is at DAL, ALK,SWA rates.

Agree.