Skywest Pay Vote in Effect

[dojetdriver]

Affirmative. ("Yes" was 'too short' of a reply)

That's pretty impressive. I wonder who they coattailed it from back then?

 

[imisscorplife]

That's pretty impressive. I wonder who they coattailed it from back then?

get over yourself, improvements in pay and QOL and everyone still whines about it. Cry that we dont have a union, cry that we voted down a pay package being non-unioned, cry that it actually gets voted down, sound like a bunch of women, just cant be happy with anything Skywest does. All because we cant share your misery of being an ALPA carrier. Im sure all this crying would go away if we were unioned, yeaaaa right.

 

[dojetdriver]

get over yourself, improvements in pay and QOL and everyone still whines about it. Cry that we dont have a union, cry that we voted down a pay package being non-unioned, cry that it actually gets voted down, sound like a bunch of women, just cant be happy with anything Skywest does. All because we cant share your misery of being an ALPA carrier. Im sure all this crying would go away if we were unioned, yeaaaa right.

Settle down beavis, don't soil your drawers

 

[Nevets]

I submit that there is a good reason why on the last three proposed pay raises your company has devised it to pit one group of its pilots against another group. The last one looks like it was an FO vs CP whereas the two before were BRO vs CRJ. And on each one of those, they've devised it so that its basically the demographics are 50% on one side vs 50% on the other side.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I submit that there is a good reason why on the last three proposed pay raises your company has devised it to pit one group of its pilots against another group. The last one looks like it was an FO vs CP whereas the two before were BRO vs CRJ. And on each one of those, they've devised it so that its basically the demographics are 50% on one side vs 50% on the other side.

That's no different than any recent ALPA contract....Happens everywhere whether ALPA or not....

 

[BHopper88]

Nevets, management just gives sapa the money and then sapa divides it up to the group.

 

[SKYWRJGUY]

I'm thinking [according to most SKYW haters, i.e. the economists and labor experts here] Southwest just screwed the industry again by agreeing to fly the 7378 for 7377 for wages. Can't wait for the ole' 'but that is different line' ...

 

[btrthn5n5]

If there is nothing to gain, then why is management so afraid of unions?

I know this isn't a union thread... but,

Ask the auto industry managers or the board of education for ANY public school district and they will easily answer why they are scared of unions. They aren't scared because "any penny given to labor comes out of their pockets", they are scared because unions make it tougher to manage a company and stay competitive and "nimble". Which could cause pennies ceasing to show up at all!

Talk to a teacher about their salary or stroll down a street in Detroit and ask anybody there if they are afraid of unions. They will probably say that the unions are a god sent, and they were the only power they "had" to stay employed. The funny thing is, they won't be able to speak with you for long because they will have to get to the unemployment office before it closes.

Looking at union driven industries, you see they SUFFER! Or at the very least, none of them are thriving. This isn't the 1950's anymore when there was plenty of labor and innovation and workers were getting screwed left and right. Today's world is a tad different.


P.S.
Nice job with the NO vote guys!! Let's see what we can do.

If the next "proposal" looks as horrible as the last one did, I'm pretty sure my personal care factor for on time performance will go to zero, and my tolerance for mx issues will head that way also. Get the pens ready, time to write up that squeaky arm rest at 2C!

 

[Nevets]

That's no different than any recent ALPA contract....Happens everywhere whether ALPA or not....

You wouldn't see a TA where BRO pilots get 0% and CRJ pilots get more. Or a TA where you have a BHO for one type of aircraft for the same type of aircraft. Or a TA where the captains get a disproportionate pay increase over FOs.

Nevets, management just gives sapa the money and then sapa divides it up to the group.

I doubt it. Your managment would not go for a pay decrease for FOs in order to give captians a 30% increase. Anyways, your management funds SAPA. Talk about conflict of interest.

I'm thinking [according to most SKYW haters, i.e. the economists and labor experts here] Southwest just screwed the industry again by agreeing to fly the 7378 for 7377 for wages. Can't wait for the ole' 'but that is different line' ...

SWAPA choses the IPA model. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, that is the way we should all get paid, IMHO. To be perfectly honest with facts, they chose to increase the pay of ALL aircraft rather than fly CRJ900 for 50 seat pay.

I know this isn't a union thread... but,

Ask the auto industry managers or the board of education for ANY public school district and they will easily answer why they are scared of unions. They aren't scared because "any penny given to labor comes out of their pockets", they are scared because unions make it tougher to manage a company and stay competitive and "nimble". Which could cause pennies ceasing to show up at all!

Talk to a teacher about their salary or stroll down a street in Detroit and ask anybody there if they are afraid of unions. They will probably say that the unions are a god sent, and they were the only power they "had" to stay employed. The funny thing is, they won't be able to speak with you for long because they will have to get to the unemployment office before it closes.

Looking at union driven industries, you see they SUFFER! Or at the very least, none of them are thriving. This isn't the 1950's anymore when there was plenty of labor and innovation and workers were getting screwed left and right. Today's world is a tad different.


P.S.
Nice job with the NO vote guys!! Let's see what we can do.

If the next "proposal" looks as horrible as the last one did, I'm pretty sure my personal care factor for on time performance will go to zero, and my tolerance for mx issues will head that way also. Get the pens ready, time to write up that squeaky arm rest at 2C!

Yeah, because its tougher to manage a company and stay competitive and nimble at SWA, the most heavily unionized airline. Remember that the airline and rail industry are governed by different laws than all other industries. That is the biggest difference between ALPA and UAW or NEA. Don't just beleive all the anti union stuff you read or hear.

 

[dojetdriver]

Yeah, because its tougher to manage a company and stay competitive and nimble at SWA, the most heavily unionized airline. Remember that the airline and rail industry are governed by different laws than all other industries. That is the biggest difference between ALPA and UAW or NEA. Don't just beleive all the anti union stuff you read or hear.

Just curious, but how are you measuring "heavily"?

 

[SKYWRJGUY]

NevJets, methinks, lacks either understanding or wisdom (or both):

It's my understanding that the troops at SWA are going to be flying the 800 for the current blended rate, which is to say, exactly the same as you mention as 90 for 50 save two elements: (a) the SWA troops are getting a 3% increase not tied to airframe based on profitability which keeps even their 'lower' rates tops--good for them; (2) your 90-50 argument is weak and only a 4th grader should buy it, simply stated: we get paid more for 70/90 flying than for 50 flying--it's the non-flying credit that is pegged at the lower rate. You would have been correct to state we fly the 90s for 70s rates but you didn't--instead you just sound like a broken, tired record with no real meaning. In sum, I don't believe SWA used a blended rate (or the IPA model) for the 738s that you specifically point out, but they will be the highest paid people regardless based on their existing scales; my guess is next time around they will get a slightly higher blended rate [in addition to performance-based raises--me likey], and you'll probably just keep making no real sense--you also proved my point about responses, even if wrong in content

 

[dojetdriver]

Yeah, because its tougher to manage a company and stay competitive and nimble at SWA, the most heavily unionized airline. Remember that the airline and rail industry are governed by different laws than all other industries. That is the biggest difference between ALPA and UAW or NEA. Don't just beleive all the anti union stuff you read or hear.

I tried to edit my post, but there's some weird ass timer on editing. Anyway, what I meant was, how are you measuring "most heavily"?

But TOTAL numbers? By unionized employees per total employees?

 

[SkyNation]

NevJets, methinks, lacks either understanding or wisdom (or both):

no, no, no. He is just lucky enough to ride on the ALPA bus. don't you know that all goodness in the airline world flows from it? He's just singin' the song, baby, and singin' along!

 

[JoeMerchant]

I said:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant
That's no different than any recent ALPA contract....Happens everywhere whether ALPA or not....

Nevet's response:

You wouldn't see a TA where BRO pilots get 0% and CRJ pilots get more. Or a TA where you have a BHO for one type of aircraft for the same type of aircraft. Or a TA where the captains get a disproportionate pay increase over FOs.

You are wrong. I saw it first hand here at ASA in 1998, when our first TA came out. I was on the ATR of which ASA only had 12. Most of our airplanes were RJs and Brasilias. Guess what happened. Year 6,7, and 8 of ATR captain rates took a PAYCUT while everyone else got a raise. But there were only a few folks who fell in that group, so it was OK. That was when I first really started to get involved in ALPA and ended up on the negotiating committee.

That first TA also had a very small FO raise.

Sorry, but you are either blinded by the BS, or you help manufacture the BS...not sure which.....

 

[JoeMerchant]

no, no, no. He is just lucky enough to ride on the ALPA bus. don't you know that all goodness in the airline world flows from it? He's just singin' the song, baby, and singin' along!

Repeat after me SkyNation...

ALPA is perfect, ALPA is great, ALPA is the reason for everything good in the universe, and ALPA cannot be held responsible for those things that aren't so good....

 

[Speedtape]

So, the last contract ASA negotiated which ALMOST brought payrates up to what Skywest pilots negotiated ten months earlier was cutting edge? Who was riding whose coat tails. Look it up. What are Skywest's rates? What are ASA's rates? Sky'west rates are a few pennies more. A few pennies more + 2% not counting the ALPA "tool" fee. ALPA HAS THE "TOOLS.". ASA used those tools to get the last contract up to speed with Skywest. In 2000, Skywest matched Comair's rates dollar for dollar. Where would you rather be working today, Comair or Skywest?

It's the same BS over and over and over again. Skywest is a great place to work. Tomorrow night at 8 p.m. new pay rates will be approved by a vote of the pilot group and the ASA pilot group will have a chance to negotiate a new contract year after next and good luck to them. I wish them the best. But stop with the "you've gotta have ALPA to get good pay scales and work rules" BS. It's just not true. If it was, Skywest wouldn't exist the way it does.

We're all pilots. We love what we do once the brake is released. Get over the misdirected bitterness toward other pilots who do the same thing you do every day. Relax. Enjoy life for a day. Then try it for two days.

Check your time line, Sport! Your rates followed ours.

 

[Speedtape]

I sit here shaking my head, but I have to remember how I felt 10 years ago when I didn't "really" understood what it meant to be in a pilot union. It's kinda like you've had your buggy pulled with a horse ones whole life, then one day you see a commercial for a car. "I gotta get me one of those things, I'm tired of that damn horse always getting me lost". Then one person says, "Don't get a Dodge (ALPA), you'll be even more lost". ???? huh. A few more people say it and pretty soon everyone who's never even driven a car isn't going to buy a Dodge. It doesn't matter if it's Chevy, Ford or Dodge, you still have to drive the car and if you get lost it's not the manufacturers fault. You're the one behind the wheel, you control where it goes.... just like a Union. (no matter the brand)

I personally feel the brand of a Union is much like the manufacturer of a car. A few bad design decisions and yes one car is worse than another, but for the most part, getting from A to B isn't on the manufacturer, but the driver (or in this case the pilot group). Now get out there and buy a car!

Bad analogies accompanied with flawed logic demonstrate a shallow understanding. Cheers!

 

[tzwarrior]

Bad analogies accompanied with flawed logic demonstrate a shallow understanding. Cheers!

shal·low

1. A message board response from Speedtape.

-----------------------------------------------------------
speed·tape

1. Flight Info poster of short responses providing little value.
2. Waster of bandwidth.

 

[Nevets]

NevJets, methinks, lacks either understanding or wisdom (or both):

It's my understanding that the troops at SWA are going to be flying the 800 for the current blended rate, which is to say, exactly the same as you mention as 90 for 50 save two elements: (a) the SWA troops are getting a 3% increase not tied to airframe based on profitability which keeps even their 'lower' rates tops--good for them; (2) your 90-50 argument is weak and only a 4th grader should buy it, simply stated: we get paid more for 70/90 flying than for 50 flying--it's the non-flying credit that is pegged at the lower rate. You would have been correct to state we fly the 90s for 70s rates but you didn't--instead you just sound like a broken, tired record with no real meaning. In sum, I don't believe SWA used a blended rate (or the IPA model) for the 738s that you specifically point out, but they will be the highest paid people regardless based on their existing scales; my guess is next time around they will get a slightly higher blended rate [in addition to performance-based raises--me likey], and you'll probably just keep making no real sense--you also proved my point about responses, even if wrong in content

That's what I'm getting at. Probably a poor choice of words. SWAPA will fly their entire fleet at a higher blended rate, even their non-flying credit. They will not create a lower rate for smaller aircraft as SKW essentially did with their large RJs. Now if SKW would have put ALL CRJ credit at the higher pay rate, you may have an argument.

I said:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant
That's no different than any recent ALPA contract....Happens everywhere whether ALPA or not....

Nevet's response:


You are wrong. I saw it first hand here at ASA in 1998, when our first TA came out. I was on the ATR of which ASA only had 12. Most of our airplanes were RJs and Brasilias. Guess what happened. Year 6,7, and 8 of ATR captain rates took a PAYCUT while everyone else got a raise. But there were only a few folks who fell in that group, so it was OK. That was when I first really started to get involved in ALPA and ended up on the negotiating committee.

That first TA also had a very small FO raise.

Sorry, but you are either blinded by the BS, or you help manufacture the BS...not sure which.....

So pilots of one aircraft type didn't get 0 while the others got a raise? And there was no BHO for same aircraft types? And there wasn't a disproportionate pay increase to captains? The only thing you said is that some captains got pay cuts, which is not any of the things I mentioned. But I get your point though.