Major Airlines New Hire QOL Survey
05-15-2013, 11:01 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,939
Basically by eliminating the massive first (and usually second) year pay differentials.
Narrowing the gap for vacation/sick as well would help too. Starting over in almost any circumstance would be a step backwards financially and QOL, but we really weaken our collecitive ability as a labor group when we paint ourselves into a corner like we do. If "starting over" meant 100+/hour, average sick time and 3 weeks vacation instead of 1 or 2 (but mostly the pay) with full insurance benefits immediately (hopefuly the CAL 6 months nonsense is on the way out for good regardless) then management wouldn't have nearly as big a number of, or as deeply dug in, automatic "save my number at all costs" vote, which everyone then has to pattern towards eventually (if not immediately).
Yet we preserve the "first year pay" paradigm, which makes us all far weaker in the long run, because by golly we had to do it so everyone else has to "pay their dues" etc. and we think we are being savvy in negotiating that pay for ourselves. To a very limited sense that may be true, but again we never consider the follow on long term effects. By preserving our current 1-2 year "new hire pay" stratedgy, we keep building our house on a soft sandy foundation in this highly and forever cyclical industry.
Every single time. We are never going to get an NSL, nor should we for reasons already discussed over many dusty horse skeletons. There are some people that (mis) manage their finances so that no matter how much they make they "can't afford a pay cut" at all and simply can't live even on 3rd year pay at a healthy legacy so you will always have a percentage of voters forever in the "yes" camp, easilly manipulated by management. But eliminating the first and second year mini B-ish scale (while the official definition is word smithed around it, that's still what it is in effect) is a great first year step. I would be willing to direct negotiating capital towards that as well; I know its not going to happen for free. Periods of gain are the time to do it anyway, usually meaning less gain at one's longevity in the first place. But long term if several airlines (especially ones that were hiring) had that in place, we would all be in a much stronger position. If you can't walk away even in theory and simply must say yes, you lost before you even start out. And yet that's how we negotiate.
First year pay is trending up niccely, although it appears to have stalled out. We'll see where the resistance level of resolve is really at come next round of negotiations in the industry. 60ish is a lot better than the 20's or 30's of not that long ago. But first year pay IMO should be 3rd year pay minus the small percentage pay step bump.
Narrowing the gap for vacation/sick as well would help too. Starting over in almost any circumstance would be a step backwards financially and QOL, but we really weaken our collecitive ability as a labor group when we paint ourselves into a corner like we do. If "starting over" meant 100+/hour, average sick time and 3 weeks vacation instead of 1 or 2 (but mostly the pay) with full insurance benefits immediately (hopefuly the CAL 6 months nonsense is on the way out for good regardless) then management wouldn't have nearly as big a number of, or as deeply dug in, automatic "save my number at all costs" vote, which everyone then has to pattern towards eventually (if not immediately).
Yet we preserve the "first year pay" paradigm, which makes us all far weaker in the long run, because by golly we had to do it so everyone else has to "pay their dues" etc. and we think we are being savvy in negotiating that pay for ourselves. To a very limited sense that may be true, but again we never consider the follow on long term effects. By preserving our current 1-2 year "new hire pay" stratedgy, we keep building our house on a soft sandy foundation in this highly and forever cyclical industry.
Every single time. We are never going to get an NSL, nor should we for reasons already discussed over many dusty horse skeletons. There are some people that (mis) manage their finances so that no matter how much they make they "can't afford a pay cut" at all and simply can't live even on 3rd year pay at a healthy legacy so you will always have a percentage of voters forever in the "yes" camp, easilly manipulated by management. But eliminating the first and second year mini B-ish scale (while the official definition is word smithed around it, that's still what it is in effect) is a great first year step. I would be willing to direct negotiating capital towards that as well; I know its not going to happen for free. Periods of gain are the time to do it anyway, usually meaning less gain at one's longevity in the first place. But long term if several airlines (especially ones that were hiring) had that in place, we would all be in a much stronger position. If you can't walk away even in theory and simply must say yes, you lost before you even start out. And yet that's how we negotiate.
First year pay is trending up niccely, although it appears to have stalled out. We'll see where the resistance level of resolve is really at come next round of negotiations in the industry. 60ish is a lot better than the 20's or 30's of not that long ago. But first year pay IMO should be 3rd year pay minus the small percentage pay step bump.
05-15-2013, 04:00 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Now we've collectivly made significant progress towards correcting this tempting cancerous bargaining mentality, but it still persists to some extent. No one at Delta is on first or second year pay right now, but I would be in favor of getting less gains next time around to fix the 2 year "new hire" scale. Then work on a preferential hire list for furloughed pilots in sort of a mutual aid pact. If UAL and AA and maybe SWA could do the same thing, then if any one airline was on the ropes, it would be a major collective asset if "vote yes or else" was replaced with "vote no and most of you still have a $100+/hr job waiting on you".
You'd still always have some pilots making more than that who "can't" take a pay cut of any size because they max out on whatever they make regardless. But it would be a significant bulwark against the automatic yes votes that the backs against the wall scenarios almost always result in.
Yeah I know, good luck getting the votes to pass it because everyone sees dollars at those first two years as half theirs and half dues to be paid. And we keep getting burned by it, every single time.
06-14-2013, 08:22 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: 7er
Posts: 1,673
2 months on Virginia Ave really sucks. There is no sugar coating it. If you can get a car there do it and you will be everyones best friend. Being new hires, we were all very excited to be there so it went by really fast. We usually took the MARTA into downtown ATL on weekends for our getaways. Looking forward to seeing new hires soon.
06-14-2013, 05:38 PM
#36
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
I can think of a lot worse things than having to wear the hat in the terminal. It comes off the moment we leave the airport and the moment we walk down the jetbridge.
But you have to wear it when you go to the lav. If you see a guy going without it on, make sure you remind him he has to have it on then.
But you have to wear it when you go to the lav. If you see a guy going without it on, make sure you remind him he has to have it on then.
06-14-2013, 08:47 PM
#38
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
06-14-2013, 09:11 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Its obvious why its written like that. There's so much mystery moisture and snail trails in those lavs there's really no other safe place to put it. Trusting those finicky little door clips could get something really nasty on something that goes on your head 20 times a day.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
