UAL hiring soon?

[Andy]

I appreciate the info, do you have any word on what they will be looking for in newhire quals? Will any United Express carrier pilots have preference? PIC turbine requirements? Thanks

Dude, until newhire apps are available, we won't know jack. If you want to fly there, apply.
I don't know the mins, but I'm going to guess that it'll be 250 hrs w/commercial & instrument.

 

[lindsaya99]

Dude, until newhire apps are available, we won't know jack. If you want to fly there, apply.
I don't know the mins, but I'm going to guess that it'll be 250 hrs w/commercial & instrument.

Awesome! I almost have that!

 

[IronCityBlue]

pots, kettles and pilots, oh my

Unfortunately, even if the ALPA carriers "fixed" things on their end and brought wages up to where they should be, it won't matter. There will always be non-union carriers like JetBlue, Skybus, Virgin, Allegiant, etc., who will use a competitor's higher wages to their advantage, and use that to increase their market share and ultimately put downward pressure on everyone else's airline pilot wages. Until all the pilots in the industry "see the light" and stop the whipsaw (or until wages get so low that no one enters the profession), we are all screwed at both the regional, national, and legacy level.

Likewise you could say that even if the non-union carriers "fixed" things on their end, the alpa carriers would use a competitor's higher wages to their advantage. UAL blamed JetBlue for their woes more than any other single carrier because of our (at the time) lower wages, then they promptly matched and in many cases undercut those very same wages and adopted their "low cost division" consisting of basicaly their entire narrowbody fleet. So when a non-union company is cheaper, they are undercutting the profession and its their fault. When an alpa company is cheaper than a non-union company, its because its still the fault of the non-union company. Not buying it.

Of course VA and SB will be cheaper than alpa majors. ALL start ups, union or not, are ALWAYS significantly cheaper than established 500+ city pair legacys. I do think the pay proposed for VA and especially SB is alarming. Not because they are non-union but because they are so well financed they are unlike almost any other start ups in history. Allegiant narrowbody captains and MaxJet widebody first class international captains' pay rates (as well as numerous others around the industry) don't bother me nearly as much as SB and VA. Some airlines are just struggling to make it, but VA has tons of cash and one of the most recognisable brands in the world.

To be absolutely fair, JB's rates when they came out were disgusting, period. JB was very well funded, although we had absolutely zero brand at the time. Since then, our rates have came up substantialy, while the rates of others has came down dramaticaly. My point is there are union carriers out there who'se pay is well below some non-union carriers, and that will always be the case. Every pilot group, union or not, benefits from other pilot groups getting higher pay, better work rules, etc, and every pilot group suffers when that trend is reversed, union or not.

I do see your point about the importance of unity and stopping the whipsaw. Speaking of whipsaw, when was the last time a major/alpa carrier reversed losses in the area of scope? In good times or in bad? This latest upswing could very well be the last one we'll see before the manifest destiny of open skies/cabotage hits us square between the eyes. You hear sabers ratteling for 30.5% pay raises, but not one whisper for getting a single 76, 70 or especially a 50 seat jet on mainline property. There is some resistance towards outsourcing the 190/195 for now, but we all know that's the next downturn away.

It is worth mentioning that CAL still has a ceiling on 50 and under seat jets that can be outsourced. I salute them for that, but am reluctantly pessimistic based on previous trends across the union/industry that such an industry leading scope clause will remain. At some point, in good times or in bad, I believe it will be sold for a bargaining credit. If I am wrong, and the CAL pilots hold the line at or below 50, maybe there will be a chance of an industry wide reversal, but I doubt it.

I would even agree on an industry wide minimum wage and maybe even a true national union/guild (I'm a level 26 pilot-barbarian with +25 charisma and unlimited charm spells :laugh: ) Sorry,Ty and Bavarian made me do that. Anyway if we were to attempt to do that, what rates would we set? The lowest rates for any unionized carrier now? I hope not. And how do we, union or not, stand up for anything more than abstract concepts when we are all in different circumstances at any given time? Even ALPA has signed off on every single concessionary deal in recent history, except the CCAir thing. Other than that, its been no holds barred. What we have IMHO is a pilot problem, not a non-union problem.

 

[ualdriver]

Likewise you could say that even if the non-union carriers "fixed" things on their end, the alpa carriers would use a competitor's higher wages to their advantage.

Do you really believe that? Look at UAL's recent history. We HAD an industry leading contract that built upon the gains of others. Do you think if JetBlue came out with industry leading wages for their aircraft TOMORROW that the ALPA carriers would be thinking to themselves, "Oh boy, let's not ask for any raises so we can finally undercut those JetBlue guys!" Or would it more likely be, "Hey UAL management, a JetBlue Captain is making 200 bucks an hour (like that would ever happen, but let's just pretend the JetBlue pilots actually got some unity) so now we want $205!" Which do you think would happen? How about at AMR? How about at DAL? Which do you think? I suspect the latter.

UAL blamed JetBlue for their woes more than any other single carrier because of our (at the time) lower wages, then they promptly matched and in many cases undercut those very same wages and adopted their "low cost division" consisting of basicaly their entire narrowbody fleet.

That's true, but it wasn't just JetBlue that our management was concerned about or most guys blamed. LIke I have said MANY times in previous posts, we also go the worst of Frontier and Airtran as well. And I'm sorry, back when we went through our second round of bankruptcy, we undercut you? You'll have to explain that to me because last I looked, I'm a 737 Captain flying a 100ish seat jet for $130 bucks an hour + a 15% (tax free) in my retirement account and you guys were paying, what, 85 bucks/hour to fly a 100 seat 737 replacement jet? Our A320 rates came DOWN to your rates, not the other way around. Listen Ironcityblue, when you guys do anything "industry leading" that doesn't undercut the rest of the industry (transcon turns, E190 rates, outsourcing of maintenance to El Salvador, how about getting inflationary adjustments for your A320 rates?, etc., etc.), I'll be one of the first here to applaud. Until then........


So when a non-union company is cheaper, they are undercutting the profession and its their fault. When an alpa company is cheaper than a non-union company, its because its still the fault of the non-union company. Not buying it.

What ALPA turbojet narrowdody operators were paying their Captains 100 bucks an hour +/- to fly a 150 passenger, 30 million dollar jet back when JetBlue got started? Maybe there were some, I don't know and I wouldn't like that, either, union carrier or not. And no, if an ALPA narrowbody carrier starts up and tries to undercut our already pathetically low rates, I'll be annoyed with them, too. It's just that right now, we have some nortorius non-union carriers that are SIGNIFICANTLY undercutting us all, hence the "non-union" comment.


Of course VA and SB will be cheaper than alpa majors. ALL start ups, union or not, are ALWAYS significantly cheaper than established 500+ city pair legacys.

Yeah, because their labor is cheaper. Labor is either the FIRST or SECOND highest cost an airline will have, and it's certainly the largest controllable cost. Any airline that can significantly undercut another solely on labor can fly with cheap seats all day and make money while the other slowly bleeds. With most airlines making slim net margins even in a good year, that's all it takes.


Allegiant narrowbody captains and MaxJet widebody first class international captains' pay rates (as well as numerous others around the industry) don't bother me nearly as much as SB and VA.

They should bother you. A lot.


Every pilot group, union or not, benefits from other pilot groups getting higher pay, better work rules, etc, and every pilot group suffers when that trend is reversed, union or not.

I agree. So what are you JetBlue guys doing about those E190 rates? Is your employee relations group (forgot its name) writing a strongly worded letter to the new CEO? How about cabotage? That may be coming in as soon as 2 years if the EU has its way. What kind of support can the unionized/ALPA carriers expect from the JetBlue pilots? Maybe another strongly worded letter from your employee relations group?


I do see your point about the importance of unity and stopping the whipsaw. Speaking of whipsaw, when was the last time a major/alpa carrier reversed losses in the area of scope? In good times or in bad?

We stopped it during our last "negotiation" when Judge Wedoff had a loaded gun to our heads and our management wanted to split the airline in half AND have >70 seat RJ's flown by our regionals. They got neither. Expect more in '09.

ALPA does a lot of good. ALPA has done some bad. I chalk the whole RJ scope thing in the latter category. Now it's just damage control.


This latest upswing could very well be the last one we'll see before the manifest destiny of open skies/cabotage hits us square between the eyes.

And what will the JetBlue, Skybus, Virgin guys do to fight this? Nothing. Thank God I have at least ALPA to put up some resistance, but I suspect that it will do little but delay the inevitable.


You hear sabers ratteling for 30.5% pay raises, but not one whisper for getting a single 76, 70 or especially a 50 seat jet on mainline property.

Maybe that's because you don't come to our union meetings or talked to our union reps? If you did, you'd hear more than a whisper, but unfortunately the handcuffs are on until '09 here. And I'll tell you right now that no one will see a sustained 30.5% pay raise because airlines like JetBlue, SkyBus, Allegiant, Virgin, etc., etc., will never even TRY to come up those levels and they'll just bleed whoever gets significant pay raises to death. But I'll hope for the best.


I would even agree on an industry wide minimum wage and maybe even a true national union/guild (I'm a level 26 pilot-barbarian with +25 charisma and unlimited charm spells :laugh: ).

I'd agree with it too. Maybe you JetBlue guys ought to lead the charge on that one? You can serve as an example for the rest of the non-union carriers.

Even ALPA has signed off on every single concessionary deal in recent history, except the CCAir thing. Other than that, its been no holds barred. What we have IMHO is a pilot problem, not a non-union problem.

That's because they had to or they wouldn't have been able to compete with the JetBlue, Airtran's, and Frontier's of the world with their discount airline pilot rates. As I said in a different thread, even if EVERY ALPA carrier so intimidated the courts, managment, the banks, etc., that they would have been able to hang onto their old rates and pensions and then exit bankruptcy, they would have slowly bled to death in the face of the existing LCC competition. UAL pilots alone gave up 1.1B per year in concessions, and many of my legacy peers did the same. I doubt any of us will net that much money in a given year. So if ALPA hadn't "signed off on every single concessionary deal" to bring our hourly rates DOWN TO YOURS, we'd be out of business because we'd be slowly bleeding to death to the tune of about 1B a year. Get it? So don't even try to espouse the idea that somehow ALPA is a failure for having to adjust to the new discount airline pilot reality that YOUR AIRLINE partially created.

 

[IronCityBlue]

blame game

Do you think if JetBlue came out with industry leading wages for their aircraft TOMORROW that the ALPA carriers would be thinking to themselves, "Oh boy, let's not ask for any raises so we can finally undercut those JetBlue guys!" Or would it more likely be, "Hey UAL management, a JetBlue Captain is making 200 bucks an hour (like that would ever happen, but let's just pretend the JetBlue pilots actually got some unity) so now we want $205!"

So you're of the opinion that your massive worldwide network airline is limited to less than a 3% premium over a relatively miniscule, mostly regional LCC? Wow, OK.

I'm a 737 Captain flying a 100ish seat jet for $130 bucks an hour + a 15% (tax free) in my retirement account and you guys were paying, what, 85 bucks/hour to fly a 100 seat 737 replacement jet?

I love a good statistical challenge. Let's see, that puts you as a 10 year narrowbody captain with the pay rate you quoted covering all 737's and A320 family aircraft. How many seats is the 737 you fly certified for? How much bigger in pax percentage is that certified seating compared to the 190?

Is it honestly your contention that in the extremely unlikely event UAL operated the E190 at mainline (our 190 rates aside for now...I'll get back to it though) you know it would 99% be outsourced to your existing or future ACMI outsourced lift providers/lowest bidders. As of right now that would require a contract ammendment/concession. The day you operate that plane on the mainline (at your current A320 payscale) your comparison will be accurate. For now you outsource 76(+)? certified seat jets, just a peach hair away from a 190, to carriers with pay scales far below JB's E190 rates, especially years 1-12 and especially FO's.

That creates a massive disparity between what's on the mainline now and the E170/175/CRJ700/705/900 (and soon 1000?) that you don't really ever think it will be flown on the mainline first of all, and at your A320 rates second of all, do you? Is the UAL pilot group prepared to fight that fight? To spend that negotiating capital on that battle? You're right, I don't go to your union meetings, so maybe you are. But good friends of mine who do go to your union meetings agree more with my pessimisim than your optimisim on this issue. I honestly hope I am wrong and you are right though.

Our A320 rates came DOWN to your rates, not the other way around. Listen Ironcityblue, when you guys do anything "industry leading" that doesn't undercut the rest of the industry (transcon turns, E190 rates, outsourcing of maintenance to El Salvador, how about getting inflationary adjustments for your A320 rates?, etc., etc.), I'll be one of the first here to applaud. Until then........

So exactly which new start up LCCs would you say set the roof on narrowbody compensation? You're limited to within a few percent of the cheapest LCC/start up out there? Really? Then the ONLY answer is re-regulation, with a twist. It will be the government's job to prohibit all new entrants and force all flying to the seniority lists of the legacys. All pilots can then get in line to get hired at them. Any airlines that are allowed to start up must match the highest pilot compensation package out there (and pay 12th year pay too, otherwise that would be an unfair advantage). Now the trick is, how do you propose we accomplish that?

The transcon turn issue again? Seriously? That's a 20 page thread by itself so I will simply say that whatever miniscule economic advantage JB would get if that were to be approved would be matched by pretty much every airline in the country in a matter of months. And of course you know that the AMP study and planned implimentation carried with it duty time/cycle/circadian restrictions no worse than today's current FAR's and there was considerable feedback for more restrictive governance in exchange for the waiving of the domestic 8 hour rule. That means even if no other FAR was changed for the better, and only the 8 hour rule was waived (worst case scenario) the slightest IROP would cause the duty out of an out of base flight crew on another coast thereby nullifying the small gain of not buying hotel rooms for the pilots, etc. It was never about "transcon turns" so much as the additional pairings that would be possible with 9-10 hours block per day. But in the end it doesn't really matter because we end up bowing down to Europe and Canada with these types of things eventually anyway. But yeah, JB=transcon turns. Right.

As for El Salvadore, that's not in the domain of pilots in general or ALPA in specific. If UAL wants to do that and they can somehow get it past the UAL mechanics union, there is nothing the UAL pilots can or will do to stop it so what's your point? Since you brought it up though, any legacys outsource heavy stuff overseas? If so, for how long have they been doing it?

What ALPA turbojet narrowdody operators were paying their Captains 100 bucks an hour +/- to fly a 150 passenger, 30 million dollar jet back when JetBlue got started?

What were the Delta Express 737 rates back in the late 90's and 2000? How many other start up/LCC's were around back then that paid significantly less than the legacys? Again, I agree with you that JB's initial rates were too low. So are the rates of every single start up airline ever. I can't even think of one exception (though there may be an occasional isolated one). That has been the case for decades and never before has been credited for the downfall of aviation.

And no, if an ALPA narrowbody carrier starts up and tries to undercut our already pathetically low rates, I'll be annoyed with them, too. It's just that right now, we have some nortorius non-union carriers that are SIGNIFICANTLY undercutting us all, hence the "non-union" comment.

OK, so let's say ALPA is able to recruit VA, SB and other start ups. We both know they are not going to do a wildcat strike unless and until they get "United plus" or even UAL book. They WILL be significantly less, and ALPA will sign off on it. Now what?

Yeah, because their labor is cheaper. Labor is either the FIRST or SECOND highest cost an airline will have, and it's certainly the largest controllable cost. Any airline that can significantly undercut another solely on labor can fly with cheap seats all day and make money while the other slowly bleeds. With most airlines making slim net margins even in a good year, that's all it takes.

Now you're scaring me because I've heard that rant before, only every other time its come from the mouths of airline management. If someone starts an airline today flying between Gary and Sanford with 2 planes, you mean to tell me they dam better match your rates/rules/retirement or they'll be dragging down the profession? The VAST majority of start up airlines don't make it and never have. They have NEVER paid top established carrier rates. They don't have the revenue generating ability to do so. You can fly anyone from anywhere to everywhere, first class if they choose. To say that's not worth a significant pay premium is rediculous.

If UAL is making billions per quarter in 2009, you can bet that exact reason will be the fuel the pilot group uses to shore up their demands for contractual improvements. If, on the other hand, UAL pulls out of a couple hundred cities, stops doing international, gets rid of first class and goes down to a quarter their current fleet, I suppose you would argue ALPA would be demanding the same pay as if they were a phenominaly profitable global legacy who just flew the world to the Olymics?

So what are you JetBlue guys doing about those E190 rates?

Raising them. Its not easy either because since we were the world launch customer, we came out with low initial rates with the promise that they would rise as the plane prooved itself. The legacy/regional airlines out there in many cases couldn't ink long term pay rates fast enough, based on and blaming JB's initial rates, well before they ever had even the theoretical ability to operate the plane on their respective properties. That was partially our fault, I will be the first to admit. We should have paid more all along, and you should NEVER have allowed the 170/175/RJ700/705/900, etc to be outsourced. That one little oversight has done and will do far more harm to the profession than any start up narrowbody domestic LCC pay scale ever will.

Is your employee relations group (forgot its name) writing a strongly worded letter to the new CEO? How about cabotage? That may be coming in as soon as 2 years if the EU has its way. What kind of support can the unionized/ALPA carriers expect from the JetBlue pilots? Maybe another strongly worded letter from your employee relations group?

Blaming JB for cabotage? Nice. I actually think ALPAPAC does some good work on the Hill for our profession, but this is to big for them to fend off. Most ALPA pilots don't support ALPAPAC though, and ALPA dues can't go to defending against that, so again I'm not completely seeing your point.

 

[IronCityBlue]

blame game II

Man I hope Surplus1 doesn't come after me for copyright infringement for this annoyingly long multipage post! :erm:

We stopped it during our last "negotiation" when Judge Wedoff had a loaded gun to our heads and our management wanted to split the airline in half AND have >70 seat RJ's flown by our regionals. They got neither. Expect more in '09.

If the situation was as precarious as you say, why didn't management simply do it? What stopped them? The pay cuts? The pension dump? Those were happening anyway were they not? So how exactly was further outsourcing stopped? While the answer to that question may serve as a nice history lesson, it in no way will refute my original contention. The loosening of scope is a one way check valve. On any given day it will either be loosened or it will remain the same. It will never, EVER be reversed, even in the best of times, because no legacy pilot group will pay to fight that fight. 2009 will come and go and, best case, you will be right where you are now with scope. You will never see an E170/175/RJ700/705 and many others at mainline.

ALPA does a lot of good. ALPA has done some bad. I chalk the whole RJ scope thing in the latter category. Now it's just damage control.

Agree to outsource the narrowbody baby-9's and Fokkers to the lowest bidding ACMI lift provider/subcontractors in existance then blame start up LCC's narrowbody pay scales for destroying the profession. Yes, I agree, we can chalk that up in the latter category.

I'd agree with it too. Maybe you JetBlue guys ought to lead the charge on that one? You can serve as an example for the rest of the non-union carriers.

There is talk of a union at JB, both ALPA and in house. ALPA was even gaining some monentum until the Airways integration fiasco. Again, another 20 page thread all by itself, but bottom line is I'd put the over/under on it happening this year now at around 35-40% ALPA, 49-60% in house. Just my swag though. Either way we did make improvements this year, and we will have a review of the industry towards the end of the year for another comparison. We are not where we need to be yet, but we are light years ahead of where we were when we started, and where VA and SB are now.

That's because they had to [match/undercut start up/LCC rates] or they wouldn't have been able to compete with the JetBlue, Airtran's, and Frontier's of the world with their discount airline pilot rates.

Again, what's different now? There have ALWAYS been start up/LCC's of the world, including the now pilot pay saviors Southwest, who for decades worked longer and harder for less. Why is it now all the sudden, every legacy is capped by the pay of every new start up? I mean, I can see why its in the management playbook to preach that, but why are so many pilots all the sudden believeing it?

So if ALPA hadn't "signed off on every single concessionary deal" to bring our hourly rates DOWN TO YOURS, we'd be out of business because we'd be slowly bleeding to death to the tune of about 1B a year. Get it?

Got it. Its JB rates. And to think for a moment I though that billion dollar swing had to do with fuel prices almost trippling, the dot com 90's going "poof", the last minute business traveller willing to pay anything anytime out of his unlimited travel expense account going away and a recession, a war and a new security paradigm burden the likes of which our nation had never seen. I now see it is primarily our fault. It is we who set the pay ceiling, and you who set the floor.

In any case, good discussion. Its nice when we can hash out issues, and even point a few fingers when appropriate, while still keeping it civil even as we both sit here scratchig our heads wondering what's the best way to restore and secure our segment of this insane industry.

 

[Frank Lorenzo]

I don't know the mins, but I'm going to guess that it'll be 250 hrs w/commercial & instrument.

Having some breasts and a really dark tan will also increase your chances significantly.

 

[MarineGrunt]

How many of you regional CA's are thinking of making the jump? By taking a quick look at airlinepilotcentral payscales, it seems like it would take quite a while to make up the pay difference, not to mention the QOL.

 

[Andy]

Having some breasts and a really dark tan will also increase your chances significantly.

Frank, do you think that's limited to UAL? News flash, bubba. The female and minority pilots that I know have been HEAVILY recruited by all majors. I know plenty of female and minority pilots who have gone to AMR, DAL, NWA, CAL, etc. A few of them told me that they were contacted by their HR department asking them to recruit their friends. This isn't a UAL issue.

 

[Ottersphere]

United Hiring

I spoke to a couple United pilots last week who seemed to think they'd be hiring, or at least interviewing, by the end of the summer. That coincides with what I have observed and been told by my United connections in recent months. UAL has a lot of appeal for me too, primarily because of their bases and my disdain for commuting. However I am nervous about how pro-merger the management seems to be. They don't seem to really care about the employees or the customers. Guess only time will tell.

jr

 

[stillflyn]

I appreciate the info, do you have any word on what they will be looking for in newhire quals? Will any United Express carrier pilots have preference? PIC turbine requirements? Thanks

I don't care one way or the other but why would UAL give preference to a pilot from a United Express carrier?

 

[ewrord]

Probably for the same reason CAL gives preference to Continental Express pilots and DAL gives preference to Delta Connection Pilots.

 

[ualdriver]

This is a long post, and Iron as much as I enjoy a good debate, I don’t have the time to respond to such lengthy posts frequently, and I imagine you don’t either. But to summarize, I just find it hypocritical for you as a JetBlue pilot to say that you’re concerned about Virgin and SkyBus pay rates as you stated in a previous post. You’re probably concerned about SB and Virgin because these airlines could grow, reach critical mass, and ultimately drag all of our rates down. That is why I assume you are concerned about them. That’s what concerns me, too. But then below, you spend a couple of pages debating me, point by point, as to why JB/LCC pay rates are NOT the proximate cause of the decline of all narrowbody pay rates in the U.S. at airlines such as mine at UAL. If you really believe that the JB’s and the LCC’s were not responsible for the spiral of airline pilot pay, work rules, and retirement that has occurred in the past few years, then why are you concerned about Virgin and Skybus as you wrote? Why are you spending so much time trying to convince me that the LCC’s had nothing to do with the current pathetic state of industry narrowbody pay rates? SB and Virgin are only doing what JetBlue and the LCC’s did in the late 90’s and early 2000’s and neither JB nor the LCC’s have done harm, correct?



So you're of the opinion that your massive worldwide network airline is limited to less than a 3% premium over a relatively miniscule, mostly regional LCC? Wow, OK.

What does that have to do with anything? The question was do you think if JetBlue came up with an industry leading rate for ANYTHING that the union/ALPA carriers would undercut it in order to obtain some sort of economic advantage? The answer is more than likely a resounding NO!.


I love a good statistical challenge. Let's see, that puts you as a 10 year narrowbody captain with the pay rate you quoted covering all 737's and A320 family aircraft…………………….. You're right, I don't go to your union meetings, so maybe you are. But good friends of mine who do go to your union meetings agree more with my pessimisim than your optimisim on this issue. I honestly hope I am wrong and you are right though.

We don’t outsource 76 seat jets, Iron. 70 seats is the scope limit. Iron, you guys are flying a 100 seat jet for pathetic wages. Period. You can argue and make points about RJ’s and outsourcing and whether or not UAL will fly them for 737 rates, etc., etc., but the point is that it isn’t an RJ, the rates are pathetic, and your group will do NOTHING to fix the problem. And if UAL had any hope of flying an E190 for 737 wages, they’re gone now. Partially thanks to you guys who single-handedly reset the rate for a 100 seat jet. Your arguments above are some convoluted attempt to rationalize the E190 rates at your airline. Sorry, I don’t buy it. I don’t think anyone else does, either. Ask them.


So exactly which new start up LCC’s would you say set the roof on narrowbody compensation? You're limited to within a few percent of the cheapest LCC/start up out there? Really? Then the ONLY answer is re-regulation, with a twist. It will be the government's job to prohibit all new entrants and force all flying to the seniority lists of the legacies. All pilots can then get in line to get hired at them. Any airlines that are allowed to start up must match the highest pilot compensation package out there (and pay 12th year pay too, otherwise that would be an unfair advantage). Now the trick is, how do you propose we accomplish that?

Disagree. There should be zero regulation. It would just be really, really nice to see the JetBlue pilots actually take some control of their situation AND STOP DRAGGING THE BAR DOWN. Is it too much to ask for maybe the JetBlue pilot group to actually raise A320 rates, for example? Just a little? How about a lousy 3%/per year adjustment to your A320 pay scale since the latest one was introduced? This convoluted argument about regulation is again another attempt to rationalize what you guys are doing. Which is nothing.


The transcon turn issue again? Seriously? That's a 20 page thread by itself so I will simply say that whatever miniscule economic advantage JB would get if that were to be approved would be matched by pretty much every airline in the country in a matter of months………. But in the end it doesn't really matter because we end up bowing down to Europe and Canada with these types of things eventually anyway. But yeah, JB=transcon turns. Right.

Great. Another JetBlue guy who thinks these transcon turns would be good for the industry. Yup, no potential for abuse with that idea. I’ll agree to let the 20 page thread speak for itself.

 

[ualdriver]

OK, so let's say ALPA is able to recruit VA, SB and other start ups. We both know they are not going to do a wildcat strike unless and until they get "United plus" or even UAL book. They WILL be significantly less, and ALPA will sign off on it. Now what?

Actually, if they got ALPA on the property they would then be in contract negotiations. I would bet the pilot group will want something resembling industry standard rates, and would negotiate accordingly. Wanna bet that if Skybus got ALPA (or anyone!) that their rates wouldn’t be 65K for an Airbus Captain anymore?


Now you're scaring me because I've heard that rant before, only every other time its come from the mouths of airline management.

Maybe because it’s true? It’s not wrong just because you heard it from an airline manager. As pilots, we’re businessmen, too, whether we like it or not. We have to make sure that what we ask for is obtainable and sustainable from a business standpoint as well. So sometimes the “rant” needs to be taken into consideration when considering the future direction of both the profession and one’s company. IMO, EVERY pilot should be familiar with their company’s financials, and those of their competitors. I am, and that’s why it concerns me when I see any pilot group lowering the bar. It’s extremely difficult for carriers with lower paid pilots, mechanics, flight attendants, etc., to compete with another with higher labor costs. There just isn’t the pad in most airline’s bottom lines (weak net margins are common, even in good years) to sustain that type of inequity.

If someone starts an airline today flying between Gary and Sanford with 2 planes, you mean to tell me they dam better match your rates/rules/retirement or they'll be dragging down the profession? The VAST majority of start up airlines don't make it and never have. They have NEVER paid top established carrier rates. They don't have the revenue generating ability to do so. You can fly anyone from anywhere to everywhere, first class if they choose. To say that's not worth a significant pay premium is rediculous.

How about not a significant pay premium, but just simply something resembling the going rate? If this new airline’s product is so good that it needs to come into business, why should the company’s bottom line be subsidized by pilot rates that are 50% below the going rate? Why does an airline’s success have to be dependant upon how little they pay their pilots vs. the overall quality of their product? If JetBlue had such a revolutionary product back in the early 2000’s, why did/does it need its pilots to subsidize its bottom line? Same holds true with SB and Virgin.

If UAL is making billions per quarter in 2009, you can bet that exact reason will be the fuel the pilot group uses to shore up their demands for contractual improvements. If, on the other hand, UAL pulls out of a couple hundred cities, stops doing international, gets rid of first class and goes down to a quarter their current fleet, I suppose you would argue ALPA would be demanding the same pay as if they were a phenominaly profitable global legacy who just flew the world to the Olymics?

Absolutely. It should not matter what type of flying you’re doing. If we’re flying a 737 at UAL, I expect to be paid something resembling a 737 industry pay rate. I don’t care what size UAL becomes or how many seats they stuff in the back or remove. If my company cannot afford to do that, then it should not be in business.

 

[ualdriver]

Its not easy either because since we were the world launch customer, we came out with low initial rates with the promise that they would rise as the plane prooved itself. The legacy/regional airlines out there in many cases couldn't ink long term pay rates fast enough, based on and blaming JB's initial rates, well before they ever had even the theoretical ability to operate the plane on their respective properties. That was partially our fault, I will be the first to admit. We should have paid more all along, and you should NEVER have allowed the 170/175/RJ700/705/900, etc to be outsourced. That one little oversight has done and will do far more harm to the profession than any start up narrowbody domestic LCC pay scale ever will.

No. You as a pilot group are not raising them. You are doing nothing. Your management gave its compliant pilot group a pay raise because they wanted to. Please don’t try to pass it off as some sort of “demand” from your pilot group that your management gave in to. My understanding is that you had guys leaving in droves, and it was cheaper to pay the raise and try to stem the flow vs. keeping the pay low and losing more pilots since movement to the Airbus left seat has significantly slowed.


Blaming JB for cabotage? Nice. I actually think ALPAPAC does some good work on the Hill for our profession, but this is to big for them to fend off. Most ALPA pilots don't support ALPAPAC though, and ALPA dues can't go to defending against that, so again I'm not completely seeing your point.

Nope. Not blaming them at all. I am blaming them, however, for doing NOTHING to help fight it. Can you argue otherwise? I wish you could. It’s just another example of how JetBlue guys, IMO, are doing nothing to help raise the bar in the industry, either pay-wise or politically.

ALPA dues cannot be used for certain direct contributions, true. But do you think Prater has anyone’s ear on Capitol Hill? I know he does. Do you think he has influence as the leader of ALPA? Yup. Again, what are the JB guys doing or even planning to do?



If the situation was as precarious as you say, why didn't management simply do it? What stopped them? The pay cuts? The pension dump? Those were happening anyway were they not? So how exactly was further outsourcing stopped?

Because they couldn’t. You see, we have a union and a voice. I don’t expect you to understand that, but that’s exactly what stopped them on some of the most egregious things like outsourcing the narrowbodies or giving the regionals anything larger than 70 seats. When you have several thousand pilots on the creditor’s committee with one voice through the union, you can kill some things. Not all, but some.

Economics prevented the pension dump from being stopped. Besides, having a pension would put us at a competitive disadvantage to airlines like yours who have little or no retirement with no hope of realistically obtaining one in the future, either.

While the answer to that question may serve as a nice history lesson, it in no way will refute my original contention. The loosening of scope is a one way check valve. On any given day it will either be loosened or it will remain the same. It will never, EVER be reversed, even in the best of times, because no legacy pilot group will pay to fight that fight. 2009 will come and go and, best case, you will be right where you are now with scope. You will never see an E170/175/RJ700/705 and many others at mainline.

Probably true.

Agree to outsource the narrowbody baby-9's and Fokkers to the lowest bidding ACMI lift provider/subcontractors in existance then blame start up LCC's narrowbody pay scales for destroying the profession. Yes, I agree, we can chalk that up in the latter category.

LCC pay rates did help destroy pilot wages in the industry. Are you arguing that those JetBlue pay rates had a beneficial effect on the industry? The outsourcing of lift to the regionals didn’t drag my A320 rates down. They may have reduced the number of those aircraft needed on my property, but they didn’t drag the rate down. However, I know that my management slid Airtran, JetBlue, and Frontier pay rates across the table when we were in bankruptcy and that DEFINITELY dragged our narrowbody wages down. Sorry, there’s no doubt in my mind.


There is talk of a union at JB, both ALPA and in house. ALPA was even gaining some monentum until the Airways integration fiasco. Again, another 20 page thread all by itself, but bottom line is I'd put the over/under on it happening this year now at around 35-40% ALPA, 49-60% in house. Just my swag though. Either way we did make improvements this year, and we will have a review of the industry towards the end of the year for another comparison. We are not where we need to be yet, but we are light years ahead of where we were when we started, and where VA and SB are now.

The industry is anxiously awaiting the arrival of ANY organization at your airline and hopefully any contract that would raise the bar just a little bit to get started. We’re also anxiously awaiting pressure being applied on Capitol Hill for U.S. by JB pilots concerning airline pilot issues. Why don’t you get you guys to contribute to ALPA-PAC while we wait? What a message that would send to all the other union pilots out there if JB guys were the largest contributors.


Again, what's different now? There have ALWAYS been start up/LCC's of the world, including the now pilot pay saviors Southwest, who for decades worked longer and harder for less. Why is it now all the sudden, every legacy is capped by the pay of every new start up? I mean, I can see why its in the management playbook to preach that, but why are so many pilots all the sudden believeing it?

See above. The start-ups are different now. They fly modern equipment. They got BIG, unlike the Western Pacifics and Vanguards of the world that never reached critical mass. That’s the BIG difference. It’s just like the fare increases you hear rumblings about every once in a while lately. Either everyone matches it, or you’re at a competitive disadvantage and ALL the fares come down to the old level. No airline can afford for their pilot rates to be significantly “out of line” or they’re at too great a cost disadvantage. I don’t think most pilots understand that. That’s why I think many should spend more time reading their company’s 10Q’s and annual reports and visiting sites like bts.gov in order to learn about what effect labor rates can have on the bottom line and the competition.