This is why the last payrates offered by NJA were "insulting."

[Diesel]

Hey G200. Some of us enjoy working here. The pay isn't great but I don't work that much so it's a trade off.

I don't have any skeletons in the closet. I'm just trying to make where I am a better place.

Your condescending attitude is nice though. Thanks.

Hey Mark put in spell check. now that's cool.

 

[FlyFlyFly]

I'm not "blaming" my employer. I am pointing out to the company stooges why the latest offer from the company is inadequate.

It SURE sounds like you are blaming your employer AND calling them names. No wonder they are so fond of their pilot group, if you are an example.

Their offer must not be inadequate enough, as there are still a large number of pilots tolerating the situation.

 

[Ultra Grump]

It SURE sounds like you are blaming your employer AND calling them names. No wonder they are so fond of their pilot group, if you are an example.

Do you know what "blame" means? It's what GW does on a daily basis, as in "It's not my fault, it's someone else's."

NetJets is my employer. Going up the chain, I suppose you could include my CP, our DO, BB, RTS, and WB. I sincerely doubt any of them are the fools who create new screen names each week to spout B.S. They are the "stooges" to which I was referring. Nice try, thanks for playing, don't let the door smack you in the ass on the way out.

Their offer must not be inadequate enough, as there are still a large number of pilots tolerating the situation.

You might want to re-read that again, slowly, and see if even you understand it.

To get back on topic, $70,000 per year is required in most of California, and many other states, just to pay the most basic bills. Under the latest proposal, a pilot here would not hit that until their 4th year. Inadequate.

 

[Heavy Set]

Do you know what "blame" means? It's what GW does on a daily basis, as in "It's not my fault, it's someone else's."

NetJets is my employer. Going up the chain, I suppose you could include my CP, our DO, BB, RTS, and WB. I sincerely doubt any of them are the fools who create new screen names each week to spout B.S. They are the "stooges" to which I was referring. Nice try, thanks for playing, don't let the door smack you in the ass on the way out.

You might want to re-read that again, slowly, and see if even you understand it.

To get back on topic, $70,000 per year is required in most of California, and many other states, just to pay the most basic bills. Under the latest proposal, a pilot here would not hit that until their 4th year. Inadequate.

I think that number is low for the LA and SFO areas. I can't imagine how people can actually own decent homes in either area. Living on a NJA salary for the first few years of employment in those areas would be very difficult indeed. I guess you would need to either leave altogether or commute as much as feasible (or allowable). Thankfully NJA offers other gateways - but that might be difficult to consider if you are a native Californian...

 

[FamilyGuy]

OK, you may have a point there. How about we make a stand to get a raise and if it doesn't work out, then go out and get a raise?

squonk - no one has a problem with the pilots negotiating for more money. They do have a problem with the way many of the pilots are going about it....stating STFD, slowing down, writing up things that they normally would not, etc....

Keep it professional - like anyone else asking for a raise - and most people will respect that.

Some have been furloughed one too many times. Some just want to put down roots and not be an aviation nomad.

If this is accurate, then these individuals should be the first ones calling for reasonable offers from both sides and putting a muzzle on the radicals yelling STFD. You would think these people would be sharing their furlough stories and bringing some much needed common sense into the negotiations.

If people truly want to put down roots then they should be aiming for a livable wage that is sustainable in the long run....not demanding a 100% raise and $200,000 bonus.

 

[FamilyGuy]

Dude, you need to chill out. I am tired of your ranting - what do you have in this fight? For years I have been reading your posts - 98% are condescending and your holier-than-thou attitude is getting tiresome. You add very little value - you just shoot others down. Boy, you're so cool!

At the end of the day, this is a forum people use to educate themselves, communicate with others and to vent their frustrations. Viewing this forum is voluntary - don't feel compelled to participate. Most people agree that the NJA guys are getting the royal $haft - so, let them vent. If you don't like the commentary, go back to the corporate board and show us all how important you think you are....

Six - what do you have in this fight? Last I checked, you didnt work at NetJets either.

Its a public board....if you dont like the negative feedback then dont read it.

If the NetJets people want to come on here and 'vent' as you describe it, then they should know and expect that they will get feedback - both positive and negative.

And I wouldnt characterize the NJA guys as 'getting the royal shaft'. Read Grump's own words....his only complaint is pay...everything else is good from his viewpoint.

 

[FamilyGuy]

I have never said "STFD."

I have never said I should be paid 3x my current pay.

You haven't said you should be paid 3x your current pay, but one of your 'negotiators' Tom Gasta did in his 3 page diatribe that was written for the benefit of all NetJets employees.

You've already said you support the union's position on negotiations, and describe them as 'solid proposals'....so what's the difference whether you said it or not?

Your union speaks for you? isnt that how it goes?

 

[FamilyGuy]

To get back on topic, $70,000 per year is required in most of California, and many other states, just to pay the most basic bills. Under the latest proposal, a pilot here would not hit that until their 4th year. Inadequate.

Yes, let's get back on topic....

So $70,000 is required just to pay the most basic bills?

Hmmm....if that's the case, then there seems to be some incongruities in your previous statements that need to be resolved...

You currently make $37,560 per year, yet you are able to afford 'basic bills' like USC Trojan Season tickets, health club dues, and martial arts dues....

If these are the 'basic bills' then what do you consider to be the frills?

Let me know how you are able to swing the Trojan season tickets....I'm still trying to figure out how to afford Buckeye season tickets....and the cost of living here in CMH is much lower than LA.

 

[Ultra Grump]

You haven't said you should be paid 3x your current pay, but one of your 'negotiators' Tom Gasta did in his 3 page diatribe that was written for the benefit of all NetJets employees.

Really? Nice try - here's the language to which you're referring:

How can the Company afford “three times current payroll”.
Answer: First, the payroll is only 2 times as much...

You've already said you support the union's position on negotiations, and describe them as 'solid proposals'....so what's the difference whether you said it or not?
Your union speaks for you? isnt that how it goes?

Yep.

 

[Ultra Grump]

Yes, let's get back on topic....

So $70,000 is required just to pay the most basic bills?

Hmmm....if that's the case, then there seems to be some incongruities in your previous statements that need to be resolved...

You currently make $37,560 per year, yet you are able to afford 'basic bills' like USC Trojan Season tickets, health club dues, and martial arts dues....

If these are the 'basic bills' then what do you consider to be the frills?

Let me know how you are able to swing the Trojan season tickets....I'm still trying to figure out how to afford Buckeye season tickets....and the cost of living here in CMH is much lower than LA.

I actually never said what I make here. I compared my former salary as a regional FO to a first-year captain at NetJets. Never said I was one. But I'll play along...

I never said I am paying the "basic bills." My wife works as well - 2 incomes allows us to live where we do. I could have Lakers, Dodgers, and Angels season tickets right now as well, if I wanted to. (Maybe if your boyfriend had a job, you could afford those Buckeye tickets...) But if we decide to start a family and have my wife stay at home, we could no longer afford to live here. We could not afford the "basic bills."

Under the current CBA, I would not be able to afford it as a 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, 4th-, 5th-, 6th-, or 7th-year captain. Under the latest proposal, I would not be able to afford it as a 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-year captain, and just barely as a 4th-year.

Is that congruous enough for you?

 

[FamilyGuy]

Really? Nice try - here's the language to which you're referring:

Yep.

Originally Posted by Tom Gasta
How can the Company afford “three times current payroll”.
Answer: First, the payroll is only 2 times as much...


Nice editing job....here's the next line...

How can the Company afford "three times current payroll".

Answer: First, the payroll is only 2 times as much, but "BM" knew that, he simply wants to dazzle you. The three times comes with the Retro pay.

 

[FamilyGuy]

I actually never said what I make here. I compared my former salary as a regional FO to a first-year captain at NetJets. Never said I was one. But I'll play along...

You dont have to say exactly what you make....you bracket it quite nicely with your earlier statements:

I came here knowing what the pay was. Overall, it's about the same (a little less, but not appreciably) as what I was making at my former job, with more upside potential.

Let's see, smart guy, my W2 from my last full year at a regional (as an FO, and nowhere near year 10) says $38,152. Netjets capt pay year 1 (most of those pesky bypass guys) is $37,560. Unless my math teacher was an idiot, last time I checked $38,152 was greater than $37,560.

I never said I am paying the "basic bills." My wife works as well - 2 incomes allows us to live where we do. I could have Lakers, Dodgers, and Angels season tickets right now as well, if I wanted to. (Maybe if your boyfriend had a job, you could afford those Buckeye tickets...) But if we decide to start a family and have my wife stay at home, we could no longer afford to live here. We could not afford the "basic bills."

Under the current CBA, I would not be able to afford it as a 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, 4th-, 5th-, 6th-, or 7th-year captain. Under the latest proposal, I would not be able to afford it as a 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-year captain, and just barely as a 4th-year.

Welcome to the United States in the 21st century.....dual income households are a fact of life these days....in fact, the majority of households in the US are dual income families.

Most of the reason for this is that everyone seems to want all the extra 'frills' - the 3,000 sq ft home, the season tickets to the alma mater, the health club memberships, etc....

We are confusing WANTS with NEEDS.

If you want those things, and you decide you're both willing to work to get those things, then that's your choice as a couple.

But you should not be trying to hold a company hostage economically to force them to pay a wage that allows you to get your "wants" on a single income basis.

Let the free market do its job and determine the appropriate level of compensation for a job. This business of artificially inflating wages above the equilibrium point will only lead to pain in the future as the market corrects itself.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Family Guy:

Free Market HAS already determined what is the approprite level of compensation and the averages are well published in this industry. The numbers are out there and have been for years.

Sad to say the pilots at Netjets are NOWHERE NEAR this level...and thats their fault. They accepted these wages.

Dual incomes are a "fact of life" these days? No they are not....maybe if you work for a bottom feeder......Most corp pilots I know can afford to have their wife stay home if she chooses and they are smart with finances.. You simply cant do this on a Netjet salary - (even if you live in a van down by the river.)

Get your money coming in the door or forever hold your peace....a hard lesson.

 

[FLYLOW22]

I'm an ass clown.

I bet Family Guy didn't get laid last night. Dude, posting at 2am on a Friday??? Scary.

 

[gunfyter]

Family guy does not have kids.

Dual Income.

Its not very possible to have your spouse work and take proper care of your children when you can't pitch in most of the time because you are on the road.

Maybe we should live on a collective farm too.

Pilots need to make a dual income on one job.

 

[Hogprint]

Fam guy posted:

Let the free market do its job and determine the appropriate level of compensation for a job

The market has a price for every airframe we operate. We don't come close on any but the BBJ. You can't in good conscience argue that.

It's OK to make money. Just ask your leadership.

 

[FamilyGuy]

Fam guy posted:

The market has a price for every airframe we operate. We don't come close on any but the BBJ. You can't in good conscience argue that.

It's OK to make money. Just ask your leadership.

I can argue that.

Its a tradeoff....give up some of the other perks that you've negotiated and you get more pay....its that simple.

NBAA wages are not applicable...not when you have much better work schedules, rules, benefits, stability, etc....

 

[Ultra Grump]

Originally Posted by Tom Gasta
How can the Company afford “three times current payroll”.
Answer: First, the payroll is only 2 times as much...


Nice editing job....here's the next line...

I know what the next line was. It doesn't refer to our "pay," which you did:

You haven't said you should be paid 3x your current pay, but one of your 'negotiators' Tom Gasta did...

The "pay" is not 3x, it's 2x.

You dont have to say exactly what you make....you bracket it quite nicely with your earlier statements:

I still don't see which years I was referring to in there, but believe what you like. Doesn't change the facts, does it?

But you should not be trying to hold a company hostage economically to force them to pay a wage that allows you to get your "wants" on a single income basis.

How exactly are we doing that? We're not on strike, in case you hadn't noticed. If you're willing to work for a wage that only fulfills your "needs" and none of your "wants," go ahead, that's your choice. I am willing to work to make my wages better so I can have some "wants," too.

Let the free market do its job and determine the appropriate level of compensation for a job. This business of artificially inflating wages above the equilibrium point will only lead to pain in the future as the market corrects itself.

Okay, professor. As has been pointed out, the free market has done its job - wages have been set in the NBAA averages. The company is artificially deflating them below the equilibrium point. We're trying to put them back where they should be.

I have had an epiphany. I have realized that I have been beating my head against a brick wall here on Flightinfo. I stepped out of a thread once before, now I'm out of the board altogether. I'm done with it. Our contract will be resolved eventually, and I'm certain that FamilyGuy, disptchrNJA, CMHTroll and the others will be VERY surprised at what the company is finally willing to step up and pay us. Time will tell. Enjoy.

 

[gunfyter]

When I get to 300 hrs on the year like the corporate guys I can stop flying?

When I only do 8 overnights a month, I get to go home everynight after that?

Their work rules and schedules are BETTER than ours. They are not on Strip alert every day and with 0001L showtimes.

 

[Hogprint]

famguy posted:

give up some of the other perks that you've negotiated and you get more pay

Told you before. Keep the crew food. I'd rather take the time to go eat.

On another note. Grump, don't give in to the FUD! Resist them to the bitter end!