Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
The ACA hypocrisy
- Thread starter datafox
- Start date
- Watchers 7
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
I can't slam the MESA pilots. They paid dearly for key scope provisions to protect and build for a future. Yes, the worst pay and work rules in existance in this country, but they are fighting the modern day Lorenzo. If my nightmare were to actually come to pass that scope they bought would be gold (plate) to me.
supsup
waiting
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2002
- Posts
- 162
Sniper@YourFeet
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2003
- Posts
- 64
Cappy said:
And Mesa's rates are HIGHER than 3 other carriers too, I'm sure.
Aren't there some other airlines who fly NB's (say American, Aloha, Alaska, jetBlue, Continental, Delta, Northwest, Spirit, Hawaiian, ATA, United, US Air, and Southwest)? How does the ACA contract compare to them?
Let's just keep everything in perspective here, guys. If we're throwing around terms like 'industry average', let's make sure we're playing with a full deck.
Last edited:
One correction, and several observations here:
ACA's new NB rate is NOT higher than AirTran's. It is higher than jetBlue's base rate, Frontier, America West and way above Spirit. It is way below Southwest & ATA, but not much below UAL & AA!
With tough negotiations, Mesa bid for our company and first NB size plane on our contract I feel that we did quite well. It would have been better if JO hadn't placed a bid on us. Thanks Mesa!
Don't forget 401K $$. As a senior NB Capt, I put in 6%, the company matches with 6% AND, depending on operating profit margin, I can expect from $4000 to over $20,000 bonus into my 401K every year. True, it could be zero bonus if the profit margin is below 4.2%, but the 6% match is always there. What is the 401K at jetBlue? I read that Mesa's 401K match is 1%. Is this true?
If you graph out rates for all LCC carriers, we are solidly in the game, with SW and ATA well above the curve. As long as they don't put a silly name on it or make me wear the purple dinasaur suit, I will hold my head high as I walk down the jetway.
'Nuff said, have a nice day...
BTW sniper, I like your weapon, but with a big gun like that I hope you qualified at better than "marksman". I qualified as expert with an M1 Garrand national match, at 600 yards, open sights, sitting & prone. Alas, that was years ago before the tri-focals. You wouldn't want to be forward of my muzzle line these days!
ACA's new NB rate is NOT higher than AirTran's. It is higher than jetBlue's base rate, Frontier, America West and way above Spirit. It is way below Southwest & ATA, but not much below UAL & AA!
With tough negotiations, Mesa bid for our company and first NB size plane on our contract I feel that we did quite well. It would have been better if JO hadn't placed a bid on us. Thanks Mesa!
Don't forget 401K $$. As a senior NB Capt, I put in 6%, the company matches with 6% AND, depending on operating profit margin, I can expect from $4000 to over $20,000 bonus into my 401K every year. True, it could be zero bonus if the profit margin is below 4.2%, but the 6% match is always there. What is the 401K at jetBlue? I read that Mesa's 401K match is 1%. Is this true?
If you graph out rates for all LCC carriers, we are solidly in the game, with SW and ATA well above the curve. As long as they don't put a silly name on it or make me wear the purple dinasaur suit, I will hold my head high as I walk down the jetway.
'Nuff said, have a nice day...
BTW sniper, I like your weapon, but with a big gun like that I hope you qualified at better than "marksman". I qualified as expert with an M1 Garrand national match, at 600 yards, open sights, sitting & prone. Alas, that was years ago before the tri-focals. You wouldn't want to be forward of my muzzle line these days!
Last edited:
This industry is feast or famine,
One one hand a short 9 CA is making close to 200K at NWAC with pension and the highest paid CMR CA is making just over 100k. The majors failed to take advantage of scope and fly all aircraft operated by their carriers. ACAI if successful we will have the opportunity to do this.
We will have the second highest rates on 50 seat RJs and with profit sharing possibly the highest. Our NB rates are in middle of the pack among the LCCs, once again with profit sharing the potential is much higher. The rates for NB will be at year 5 for all pilots on property by 2007 when the contract is open for section 6 so the top rate at year 12 is of less importance at this time.
It is a compromise with the RJ rates on the high side and NB rates slightly lower than average. As to the J41 FOs and FRJ FOs that are taking a 3% cut and make under 30K a year. By all estimations the aircraft will not be on property by the end of 2004. If by chance the FRJs are still here the CRJ FO pay protection is still valid.
Say what you will, but these are reasonable wages for a start up LCC and if we are successful they will be higher.
Just hope mesa doesn't acquire us. They will lower the industry average for Eagle, Airwhisky, and the other regionals. With our cash they will be able to finance more CRJ700/900s to undercut AWA pilots and CRJ700s to undercut USair pilots.
One one hand a short 9 CA is making close to 200K at NWAC with pension and the highest paid CMR CA is making just over 100k. The majors failed to take advantage of scope and fly all aircraft operated by their carriers. ACAI if successful we will have the opportunity to do this.
We will have the second highest rates on 50 seat RJs and with profit sharing possibly the highest. Our NB rates are in middle of the pack among the LCCs, once again with profit sharing the potential is much higher. The rates for NB will be at year 5 for all pilots on property by 2007 when the contract is open for section 6 so the top rate at year 12 is of less importance at this time.
It is a compromise with the RJ rates on the high side and NB rates slightly lower than average. As to the J41 FOs and FRJ FOs that are taking a 3% cut and make under 30K a year. By all estimations the aircraft will not be on property by the end of 2004. If by chance the FRJs are still here the CRJ FO pay protection is still valid.
Say what you will, but these are reasonable wages for a start up LCC and if we are successful they will be higher.
Just hope mesa doesn't acquire us. They will lower the industry average for Eagle, Airwhisky, and the other regionals. With our cash they will be able to finance more CRJ700/900s to undercut AWA pilots and CRJ700s to undercut USair pilots.
transienttorque
Havin' a pint
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2003
- Posts
- 60
Transient Torque,
There are a lot of perspectives and most have a basis that's real. That said, I know that the quality of the contract does not describe the quality of the pilot group. Be unified and educate your pilot group - that, is the best thing all of us can do.
Can I borrow that ear flapping phrase?
There are a lot of perspectives and most have a basis that's real. That said, I know that the quality of the contract does not describe the quality of the pilot group. Be unified and educate your pilot group - that, is the best thing all of us can do.
Can I borrow that ear flapping phrase?
Doesn't jetBlue pay time-and-half above 70 hours? Is anyone taking this into consideration? What about all of the stock you get at JB when you're a new hire? That's got to be worth quite a bit. As far as I'm concerned, ACA came in WAY below JB when this is factored in.w4mch said:
And I'm sorry, but I'm getting a little tired of comparing ACA's CRJ rates to, well...ANYONE'S! This is an apples to oranges comparison. ACA will be operating under a LCC business plan. Who else is operating 50 seaters under a LCC business plan? This is entirely different from the regional feed business plan under which ALL other CRJ's operate. Not to mention that most of those operate under a fixed fee-per-departure structure, which essentially caps an airlines earnings. ACA will have virtually no limit on their earnings potential. Use Tom Moore's own numbers...70% load factor at $149 average one-way fare. That's $5215 per departure, not including load factors higher than 70% or revenue from mail or other small cargo. Doesn't ACA currently make approximately $3000 per departure? I realize there is increased overhead and expenditure when operating as a stand-alone, but TM said this will be minimal...mostly advertising. Online ticket sales will be handled via a third party and will be very inexpensive. So why should an ACA pilot earn less than a Comair pilot to fly the CRJ? That's like saying a cop should make the same money as a taxi driver because they both drive a Chevy Caprice. Is that a fair comparison? Tell me what SWA or JB would pay their pilots if they had a 50 seat pay rate. I doubt it would be less than Comair.
What about the loss of conflict pay? This could impact your pay SIGNIFICANTLY. I didn't happen to see anyone here mention that ALL NB CA's will start on the year 2 wage either. This means the most senior pilot in the company and the most junior pilot in the company are making the same wage in the left seat of the NB. How does that compare to SWA and JB?
My point is this...I hope ACA is successful as a stand alone. But I think the comparisons aren't fair. It's not about what Comair gets paid. Comair might as well be a cosmetics company. It's a different business plan and in my opinion, not relevant. And what about the fact that JB gets paid time-and-a-half above 70 hours (plus the stock they get)? And the year 2 payrate for all NB CA's? And the fact that the work rule changes (conflict pay) will significantly reduce your take home pay? I really don't see how this TA in on par with JB or SWA.
RogerOver
Last edited:
FLB717
Pilot=proof of Gods humor
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2003
- Posts
- 627
ACA NB rates are less that JBLU and FRNT and SWA. SWA by a long shot. The numbers I gave are wrong in pay, add 13% because it is 320/737-800 we are comparing. That tops us at 172 on this contract when a 738 shows up. ACA NB rates dont compare. A CMR 70 Capt will top at 120 tp ACA 139 fro twice the aircraft. I wish you all well but truthfully Im scared for you, a lot.
A couple of points,
Comair and ACA LCC RJ rates are apples to apples. Comair is wholly owned by DAL and profit derived from Comair goes directly to DAL's bottom line. So what is the difference between a pilot at CMR/ASA flying ROC-CVG-BHM and a pilot at ACA (LCC)flying ROC-IAD-BHM. None, because any profit/loss goes to the parent company's bottom line.
I may be incorrect but I believe JetBlue pilots receive stock options. Stock or stock options are great for the initial employees but provide diminishing return for subsequent employees. Who the heck wants time and a half after 70 hours? Why not receive a flat rate for flying? As a pilot I want the opportunity to drop trips without incuring substantial penalties for not flying 90 hours a month.
ACAI pilots receive unlimited profit sharing. It is prorated 2.5% to 7.5% of operating income. If we make over 16% profit then we receive 7.5% of that in our 401K, tax exempt. With a large profit that 2 - 5 year NB captain can make 20K or more in his/her 401K in addition to 5% match for those with 9 years at the company plus whatever the maximum 401K contribution for an individual. This is a very lucrative market based retirement plan independent of the company.
So we give up say 5% average in transition pay and 3%, taxable for the potential of over 15% income tax exempt, not so bad.
Comair and ACA LCC RJ rates are apples to apples. Comair is wholly owned by DAL and profit derived from Comair goes directly to DAL's bottom line. So what is the difference between a pilot at CMR/ASA flying ROC-CVG-BHM and a pilot at ACA (LCC)flying ROC-IAD-BHM. None, because any profit/loss goes to the parent company's bottom line.
I may be incorrect but I believe JetBlue pilots receive stock options. Stock or stock options are great for the initial employees but provide diminishing return for subsequent employees. Who the heck wants time and a half after 70 hours? Why not receive a flat rate for flying? As a pilot I want the opportunity to drop trips without incuring substantial penalties for not flying 90 hours a month.
ACAI pilots receive unlimited profit sharing. It is prorated 2.5% to 7.5% of operating income. If we make over 16% profit then we receive 7.5% of that in our 401K, tax exempt. With a large profit that 2 - 5 year NB captain can make 20K or more in his/her 401K in addition to 5% match for those with 9 years at the company plus whatever the maximum 401K contribution for an individual. This is a very lucrative market based retirement plan independent of the company.
So we give up say 5% average in transition pay and 3%, taxable for the potential of over 15% income tax exempt, not so bad.
Last edited:
Carl_Everett
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2003
- Posts
- 62
RogerOver said:
Conflict pay was going away no matter what. The company would have implemented PBS anyway. Yes you will loose out on conflict pay until PBS is up and running, but the green book already allowed for the PBS and thus the loss of conflicts.
The resetting of longevity for NB pilots is another different issue. It only affects pilots on the senoirity list at the date of signing. Any new-hires will not have that stipulation. Why did ALPA agree to it? I can only assume that they were willing to give up the longevity pay to help the company get the LCC started. I am sure they used the logic that if the LCC didn't happen the only way ACA's senior pilots would make it to the left seat of a NB was to quit ACA and take a pay cut. This way they will get a pay raise AND fly NB's.
When JBLU was two years old, all CA's were paid as two year CA's or less. If a new LCC comes along, all CA's will be 1st year CA's. That is all ACA did. They made the NB's pay set up like a new LCC.
I think it is unfair to expect ACA ALPA to get a T/A that made them on par with SWA, JBLU, etc. We need to wait and see if this LCC is successful. If it is successful, then hold your criticism until the T/A expires and a new contract is signed. IF ACA is as successful as SWA and JBLU in a few years, the pilots better be compensated like SWA and JBLU.
My point is not that the TA should have included a time-and-a-half provision. I'm simply pointing out that comparing the TA hourly wage to JB's hourly wage isn't a straight comparison. If ACA's lines are supposed to be constructed as close as possible to 89 hours, that equates to 19 hours that are flown above 70 hours. Flying this same amount at JB will pay 19 hours at something like $190 per hour. So how can you look at the TA pay rate and say it's on par with JB? That's only true if no one ever gets paid above 70 hours per month. That's a lot of $$$.exphojump said:
Roger
You do have a point RogerOver, but if you refer to my last post on the subject, I said our rate is above jetBlue's BASE rate. Our MEC calculated an average month rate for JB, and the rate we settled on was very close to that rate.
We are splitting hairs here. In reality, my company has come to a triple fork in the road. One road leads to NB jets and an independent operation. another fork leads to a ACA/UAX agreement in which I stay in a CRJ, we furlough many pilots in parking the J-41's and everybody takes a 7.5% cut to keep the UAX business. The last fork in the road is even worse, being Mesa'd. True, there is no pay cut in that option, but does anybody really think that would last for long?
JB guys get stock. Guess what, I got ACA stock years ago. 1500 shares for free that split twice, sold for $30 each and paid for my house. If our new operation is successful I will get a fat bonus each year to my 401K in addition to my 6% company match. Thats not shabby for a regional airline trying to break into the big time.
In a perfect world I would be pitching a fit over having to go in to the big jet at 2nd year captain pay as I am an 18 year crj driver now. However, with UAL's bankruptcy and mesa trying to blow our house down, I again say our negotiating committee did a good job. A 97% yes vote for ratification speaks for itself.
We are splitting hairs here. In reality, my company has come to a triple fork in the road. One road leads to NB jets and an independent operation. another fork leads to a ACA/UAX agreement in which I stay in a CRJ, we furlough many pilots in parking the J-41's and everybody takes a 7.5% cut to keep the UAX business. The last fork in the road is even worse, being Mesa'd. True, there is no pay cut in that option, but does anybody really think that would last for long?
JB guys get stock. Guess what, I got ACA stock years ago. 1500 shares for free that split twice, sold for $30 each and paid for my house. If our new operation is successful I will get a fat bonus each year to my 401K in addition to my 6% company match. Thats not shabby for a regional airline trying to break into the big time.
In a perfect world I would be pitching a fit over having to go in to the big jet at 2nd year captain pay as I am an 18 year crj driver now. However, with UAL's bankruptcy and mesa trying to blow our house down, I again say our negotiating committee did a good job. A 97% yes vote for ratification speaks for itself.
GogglesPisano
Pawn, in game of life
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2003
- Posts
- 3,939
RogerOver said:
Funny how the analysts aren't as optimistic as you. Those that aren't saying Mesa's takeover attempt will be successful are saying that our LCC will not. This TA made perfect sense to me. How can we shoot for the moon when we've got Mesa breathing down our neck and analysts being negative before we even get off the ground? When '07 rolls around, the profits are going into our 401k's and we've ordered another 100 NB's, I'll eat my hat. In the meantime, we should be thankful for what we've got.
We are basically going to be a start-up next year. I think the NC did an outstanding job.
belchfire
unpredictable member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2003
- Posts
- 27,769
Someone on the last page said mesa
had the worst pay in the industry.
Ignorance is rampant! No raises at
corpex for two years now, no end in
sight. No jets for jobs, but we won't
ever have them...why? no jets!bet
Lakes guys are in about the same
boat since one of our former fearless
leaders went there!
Mesa, while notan icon of what this
industry should be is not leading the
race to the bottom...they spun out in
turn two and will never catch up!!!
Orenstein, ya scum! Hear that? there
is someone that pays less than You!!!
Ha!!!
I hope that ACA is succesful in the bid
to start a new page in airline history.
had the worst pay in the industry.
Ignorance is rampant! No raises at
corpex for two years now, no end in
sight. No jets for jobs, but we won't
ever have them...why? no jets!bet
Lakes guys are in about the same
boat since one of our former fearless
leaders went there!
Mesa, while notan icon of what this
industry should be is not leading the
race to the bottom...they spun out in
turn two and will never catch up!!!
Orenstein, ya scum! Hear that? there
is someone that pays less than You!!!
Ha!!!
I hope that ACA is succesful in the bid
to start a new page in airline history.
beezlebozo
Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Posts
- 13
Carl_Everett said:
Not true. Read the language again - it was put there specifically to PREVENT the company from implementing PBS. If those two paragraphs weren't in the contract, the company could implement PBS whenever they wanted.
This is from talking to someone who helped write that language...
Beezlebozo
Clown from Hell
Carl_Everett
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2003
- Posts
- 62
beezlebozo said:
I guess I should have worded that better. I agree that it was in the green book to prevent the company from just implementing PBS. It would require the union to approve any changes before it happened. But the statement "The company intends to implement PBS in the future...", shows that it had been discussed. Like it or not, the company wanted PBS, and they were going to get it one way or another. What would you be willing to give up in exchange for not giving the company PBS? pay rates? min days off? junior manning? I am not saying it was right to give it up, just that it was going to happen.
beezlebozo
Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Posts
- 13
Carl_Everett said:
Nothing had to be given up. They can't implement PBS unless we agree to terms. If our terms for parameters are unreasonable, and we can't agree, the company can't (correction: couldn't) implement PBS. This is, of course, under our green book language, not under either LOA. There's no negotiation involved. Those two paragraphs prevented the company from implementing PBS.
You said the company wanted PBS, and were going to get it one way or the other, but that isn't the case. They couldn't get it unless we gave it to them. They've wanted PBS for at least the last three years, and that language has been in the contract since the beige book.
Beezlebozo
Clown from Hell
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
