Delta Pilots Association
12-06-2010, 06:14 AM
#3301
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
$5000 was in no way meant to have a real discussion, you know that, I know that, everyone knows that.
12-06-2010, 06:50 AM
#3302
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Flying the SEC
Posts: 2,350
One you say is too much and one you say is not engough. Well who or what determines what is too much and what is too little. I submit the determiner is the market. Using historical anecdotes just clouds the issue and has no relevance to today's market conditions.
12-06-2010, 07:04 AM
#3303
Get's Every Day Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 1,860
Expectations
1) I expected to make six figures within 5 years
2) I expected my health care insurance cost to be zero
3) I expected to work weekends and holidays, but with that said, I had an expectation not to be molested at home on my days off without hiding behind (or paying for) extraneous telecommunication devices or services.
4) I expected some extra cash be put into my 401(k)
5) I expected a fully funded DB plan waiting for me at retirement
6) I expected that retirement to occur at age 60
7) I expected that the primary concern of the certificate holder, in whose employ I was in, to be the direct execution of air transportation, and not a shell corporation whose goal was to only act as a ticket clearing house.
8) I expected my union representation to represent the employment and employment conditions of my pilot group as it's primary concern, and not to feed the maw of another multi-million dollar corporation attempting to aid my employer with #6.
Now some of these conditions have been satisfied, and some have not, and some are in progress. I'll leave it up to the reader to figure out which is which. Any questions?
Nu
2) I expected my health care insurance cost to be zero
3) I expected to work weekends and holidays, but with that said, I had an expectation not to be molested at home on my days off without hiding behind (or paying for) extraneous telecommunication devices or services.
4) I expected some extra cash be put into my 401(k)
5) I expected a fully funded DB plan waiting for me at retirement
6) I expected that retirement to occur at age 60
7) I expected that the primary concern of the certificate holder, in whose employ I was in, to be the direct execution of air transportation, and not a shell corporation whose goal was to only act as a ticket clearing house.
8) I expected my union representation to represent the employment and employment conditions of my pilot group as it's primary concern, and not to feed the maw of another multi-million dollar corporation attempting to aid my employer with #6.
Now some of these conditions have been satisfied, and some have not, and some are in progress. I'll leave it up to the reader to figure out which is which. Any questions?
Nu
Not to mention, I also expected to be a Captain in year 12 or at least the opportunity to be one. I just started year 12, can't even come close to holding captain.
12-06-2010, 07:41 AM
#3304
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
We wouldn't be justified in asking for that much because historically pilots wages have never commanded that amount of buying power and and it would be an exponential jump over what we have had in the past.
In essence, I've always heard that back in the 1970's a captain could buy a car with one months check. I've never heard that his first officer could buy a house/mansion with one months check.
As professionals, we should always move our pay and benefits forward, not backwards.
To run a counter to your argument, maybe you could explain to us why $50 per hour for a B-747-400 captain would be too low of a pay rate in your mind?
In essence, I've always heard that back in the 1970's a captain could buy a car with one months check. I've never heard that his first officer could buy a house/mansion with one months check.
As professionals, we should always move our pay and benefits forward, not backwards.
To run a counter to your argument, maybe you could explain to us why $50 per hour for a B-747-400 captain would be too low of a pay rate in your mind?
That is the same reason why $5,000 is too high, there is no way for the company to afford that type of pay and that is not what the market for pilots is. So somewhere between $50 and $5,000 is the sweet spot for our next negotiation. That is the discussion I want to have.
The only attempt to answer the question was to use an emotional argument, that is the "historical pay" argument. Back in the 1970's to buy a computer with the processing and storage power of my little laptop would have cost tens of millions of dollars and required and entire floor of an office building to house including a self contained cooling system and a halon fire extinguisher. Back in the 1970's a typical house was 1,700 square feet and was affordable to only about 50% of the population. Back in the 1970's they had really groovy clothes.
What happened in the past is absolutely irrelevant. We live in a capitalistic society and capitalism means market based solutions. You negotiate what the market will bear. I don't need to make a theoretical argument I have a real world solution that proves my point.
When the APA entered section 6 negotiations they decided to use an emotional, historical based argument to justify their ask. They took some inflation adjustment of some historical pay rate in the past and made some important looking calculations that surely took at least 5 minutes in Excel, backed it up with another 50 graphs that took at least 5 minutes each and then said "we want a 51% pay raise." The answer the NMB gave them was essentially, "pretty pictures, nice graph, now what does that have to do with the price of tea in China." APA's historical argument had nothing to do with what their company could pay and nothing to do with the rest of the industry. So they have sat. And sat. And sat some more. They have gotten nothing because their arguments are based on nothing. The NMB just told them, see you later, call me when you have something rational to say. The NMB walked out of negotiations to spend their time elsewhere. Excellent recipe for success there.
So the question we face on this topic is how do you narrow down the range between $50 and $5,000 an hour. If you try to use an emotional argument like that's what history says, or that's what I made in 2003, or that's what I "expected" when I signed up for this job, then expect to sit.
If you use a market based approach, then you will have to make your market based argument and you will most likely have a chance to make some progress. You can be damn sure that the company will have a very solid market based argument about why you need less, so if you want to try to counter that with fairy tales about life back in the 1970's when a Captain could buy a car a month, then expect to get run over, hard.
If the pilot group decides on some emotional argument, then there will be some point in the future when practical pilots will notice that, like the APA, their paycheck hasn't changed in 4 years. They will then probably respond like the APA just did and find some people to make a business case for a market based solution and they may actually get a pay raise. It won't be what the "true believers" like NewK, 88, Carl, and the rest say, but it will actually help you pay your bills. I also checked with my bank, and they don't take emotional pipe dreams to pay the mortgage, but they do accept cash.
So in a market based approach, there are market conditions that would justify a 100% raise. There are also market conditions that would only justify a much smaller raise. Two years from now, your ask has to be based on the market conditions and not some useless emotional argument. Setting a mark at a XX% raise right now might be too high, might be too low, but trying to look backwards is an exercise in futility.
12-06-2010, 07:56 AM
#3306
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Actually it was meant to have a serious discussion. I picked a number abnormally high to make a specific point. I see that since no one gave a serious answer, they know exactly what the point is. The reason that $50 an hour is too low is that in the "marketplace" for pilots that number is not marketable. The company can afford more and pilots can find other employment to beat that if somehow they could force that on us.
That is the same reason why $5,000 is too high, there is no way for the company to afford that type of pay and that is not what the market for pilots is. So somewhere between $50 and $5,000 is the sweet spot for our next negotiation. That is the discussion I want to have.
The only attempt to answer the question was to use an emotional argument, that is the "historical pay" argument. Back in the 1970's to buy a computer with the processing and storage power of my little laptop would have cost tens of millions of dollars and required and entire floor of an office building to house including a self contained cooling system and a halon fire extinguisher. Back in the 1970's a typical house was 1,700 square feet and was affordable to only about 50% of the population. Back in the 1970's they had really groovy clothes.
What happened in the past is absolutely irrelevant. We live in a capitalistic society and capitalism means market based solutions. You negotiate what the market will bear. I don't need to make a theoretical argument I have a real world solution that proves my point.
When the APA entered section 6 negotiations they decided to use an emotional, historical based argument to justify their ask. They took some inflation adjustment of some historical pay rate in the past and made some important looking calculations that surely took at least 5 minutes in Excel, backed it up with another 50 graphs that took at least 5 minutes each and then said "we want a 51% pay raise." The answer the NMB gave them was essentially, "pretty pictures, nice graph, now what does that have to do with the price of tea in China." APA's historical argument had nothing to do with what their company could pay and nothing to do with the rest of the industry. So they have sat. And sat. And sat some more. They have gotten nothing because their arguments are based on nothing. The NMB just told them, see you later, call me when you have something rational to say. The NMB walked out of negotiations to spend their time elsewhere. Excellent recipe for success there.
So the question we face on this topic is how do you narrow down the range between $50 and $5,000 an hour. If you try to use an emotional argument like that's what history says, or that's what I made in 2003, or that's what I "expected" when I signed up for this job, then expect to sit.
If you use a market based approach, then you will have to make your market based argument and you will most likely have a chance to make some progress. You can be damn sure that the company will have a very solid market based argument about why you need less, so if you want to try to counter that with fairy tales about life back in the 1970's when a Captain could buy a car a month, then expect to get run over, hard.
If the pilot group decides on some emotional argument, then there will be some point in the future when practical pilots will notice that, like the APA, their paycheck hasn't changed in 4 years. They will then probably respond like the APA just did and find some people to make a business case for a market based solution and they may actually get a pay raise. It won't be what the "true believers" like NewK, 88, Carl, and the rest say, but it will actually help you pay your bills. I also checked with my bank, and they don't take emotional pipe dreams to pay the mortgage, but they do accept cash.
So in a market based approach, there are market conditions that would justify a 100% raise. There are also market conditions that would only justify a much smaller raise. Two years from now, your ask has to be based on the market conditions and not some useless emotional argument. Setting a mark at a XX% raise right now might be too high, might be too low, but trying to look backwards is an exercise in futility.
That is the same reason why $5,000 is too high, there is no way for the company to afford that type of pay and that is not what the market for pilots is. So somewhere between $50 and $5,000 is the sweet spot for our next negotiation. That is the discussion I want to have.
The only attempt to answer the question was to use an emotional argument, that is the "historical pay" argument. Back in the 1970's to buy a computer with the processing and storage power of my little laptop would have cost tens of millions of dollars and required and entire floor of an office building to house including a self contained cooling system and a halon fire extinguisher. Back in the 1970's a typical house was 1,700 square feet and was affordable to only about 50% of the population. Back in the 1970's they had really groovy clothes.
What happened in the past is absolutely irrelevant. We live in a capitalistic society and capitalism means market based solutions. You negotiate what the market will bear. I don't need to make a theoretical argument I have a real world solution that proves my point.
When the APA entered section 6 negotiations they decided to use an emotional, historical based argument to justify their ask. They took some inflation adjustment of some historical pay rate in the past and made some important looking calculations that surely took at least 5 minutes in Excel, backed it up with another 50 graphs that took at least 5 minutes each and then said "we want a 51% pay raise." The answer the NMB gave them was essentially, "pretty pictures, nice graph, now what does that have to do with the price of tea in China." APA's historical argument had nothing to do with what their company could pay and nothing to do with the rest of the industry. So they have sat. And sat. And sat some more. They have gotten nothing because their arguments are based on nothing. The NMB just told them, see you later, call me when you have something rational to say. The NMB walked out of negotiations to spend their time elsewhere. Excellent recipe for success there.
So the question we face on this topic is how do you narrow down the range between $50 and $5,000 an hour. If you try to use an emotional argument like that's what history says, or that's what I made in 2003, or that's what I "expected" when I signed up for this job, then expect to sit.
If you use a market based approach, then you will have to make your market based argument and you will most likely have a chance to make some progress. You can be damn sure that the company will have a very solid market based argument about why you need less, so if you want to try to counter that with fairy tales about life back in the 1970's when a Captain could buy a car a month, then expect to get run over, hard.
If the pilot group decides on some emotional argument, then there will be some point in the future when practical pilots will notice that, like the APA, their paycheck hasn't changed in 4 years. They will then probably respond like the APA just did and find some people to make a business case for a market based solution and they may actually get a pay raise. It won't be what the "true believers" like NewK, 88, Carl, and the rest say, but it will actually help you pay your bills. I also checked with my bank, and they don't take emotional pipe dreams to pay the mortgage, but they do accept cash.
So in a market based approach, there are market conditions that would justify a 100% raise. There are also market conditions that would only justify a much smaller raise. Two years from now, your ask has to be based on the market conditions and not some useless emotional argument. Setting a mark at a XX% raise right now might be too high, might be too low, but trying to look backwards is an exercise in futility.
It's really easy to just dismiss someone's argument as "emotional." Fear is an emotion too. And it can be quite paralyzing.
12-06-2010, 07:56 AM
#3307
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Another thing to mention is that industry consolidation has allowed the airlines to restore some pricing power back from the marketplace. The government is mainly responsible for weakening the the overall health of the industry through the bailouts of carriers in ominous positions through the last 20 years. This lead to the overcapacity in the industry causing a lose of pricing power, which in turn lead to underfunding of the pilot contracts, and eventually sank the profession. This in turn allowed Southwest to expand rapidly in the markets the legacy airlines still had pricing power in.
Two things will have to happen before full restoration can be achieved.The first is industry consolidation, the second is scope recapture. You will have to have both before it is possible to get C2K rates back. The former restores the pricing power for the airline, the latter restores the pricing power of the pilots.
Two things will have to happen before full restoration can be achieved.The first is industry consolidation, the second is scope recapture. You will have to have both before it is possible to get C2K rates back. The former restores the pricing power for the airline, the latter restores the pricing power of the pilots.
12-06-2010, 08:25 AM
#3309
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Some of you guys have really great info on here and some real good insider stuff. While talking about our contract coming up and our approach I am starting to wonder who some of you are and what side you are on. This kumbaya bs with management and the company is starting to smell.
12-06-2010, 08:32 AM
#3310
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
The $5000/hour argument is like the old joke about asking a woman if she will sleep with you for a million dollars...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 11:33 AM
