News on the new Skywest pay package
06-07-2017, 05:34 AM
#421
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 155
QOL improvements through growth?
In my experience there has been one constant: Needs of the airline always come before you.
If the company takes on growth or becomes short on staffing they will simple program PBS to put more flying on your schedule.
This TA contains no outright improvements to QOL. No additional days offs etc.
In my experience there has been one constant: Needs of the airline always come before you.
If the company takes on growth or becomes short on staffing they will simple program PBS to put more flying on your schedule.
This TA contains no outright improvements to QOL. No additional days offs etc.
06-07-2017, 05:55 AM
#422
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 72
No it's NOT happening either way! When are we going to get it? This isn't some high school drama game they are playing with us. There are many other airlines who would love to have extra flying. They can (and might) just say screw it and let most of it go away/ They could also give it to the XJT side of the house (and could just to prove a lesson to us).
Giving guys their equal pay is SMART business. If you have to staff extra planes, this is a good way to go.
Most people on here complaining do so habitually. If they gave us a 15% raise, they would ***** about it (why not 17%?!) They need to stop being so selfish and try and see the big picture. WE AREN'T GOING TO GET MAINLINE/LCC MONEY!
This is a good TA for who we are and we need to understand that. Do you want growth? Better pay? Better QOL? Upgrade faster? Be based at and/or closer to home? Then VOTE YES.
I'M VOTING YES (and you should too!)
Giving guys their equal pay is SMART business. If you have to staff extra planes, this is a good way to go.
Most people on here complaining do so habitually. If they gave us a 15% raise, they would ***** about it (why not 17%?!) They need to stop being so selfish and try and see the big picture. WE AREN'T GOING TO GET MAINLINE/LCC MONEY!
This is a good TA for who we are and we need to understand that. Do you want growth? Better pay? Better QOL? Upgrade faster? Be based at and/or closer to home? Then VOTE YES.
I'M VOTING YES (and you should too!)
No one on here is asking for anything close to mainline pay dude, quit making stuff up. Also if we vote it down they will go back and get their second offer for us. What are you basing your opinions on? When has OO ever taken any significant amount of flying and given it to xjet (a union company that management hates).
Any DEN based pilot should fear growth right now because we won't see any of it. In fact it will probably hurt us. A ton of our pairings go through ATL.
The length of the agreement sucks. Let's do a 2 year contract. If we agree to this the rest of the industry will see rising pay and we will have our hands tied for 5 years.
Vote no on this.
06-07-2017, 06:15 AM
#424
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Position: 175 CA
Posts: 1,544
Personally even if they double the increase (unlikely) I'd only make maybe $150 more a month, where if I growth happens and I could move up 40 spots for instance in base I'd make that and then some and have a better schedule. Like others have mentioned I'm on the fence about whether growth will happen or not, I'm leaning towards that it will. They have to do something to compete for recruiting eventually, and this isn't it, some of the bonuses at other regionals are expiring soon (and no I don't believe for a second they will be rolled into hourly rates)
06-07-2017, 06:39 AM
#425
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: RJ Captain
Posts: 1,183
I'm not sure if everyone here is actually part of the pilot group. Some look like a paid company spokesman or Ford and Harrison employee. Look at the join/post count for the answer.
If you look past the first year this isn't that good of a deal. It's not that much even in the first year..
And I can't help but think the company wants to push this through before they have to start offering big bonuses to all of the new hires. Nothing like being on the seniority list and having the new guy getting a $20-30K check while you get 1-2%.
If you look past the first year this isn't that good of a deal. It's not that much even in the first year..
And I can't help but think the company wants to push this through before they have to start offering big bonuses to all of the new hires. Nothing like being on the seniority list and having the new guy getting a $20-30K check while you get 1-2%.
06-07-2017, 06:43 AM
#426
New Hire
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 2
From Russ
Hey all,
This is Russ Jacobie, I think I've only posted here once or twice in the past but I wanted to log in and see what this forum thinks of the pay package and obviously read this thread.
It's good feedback! Honestly, it's interesting to see what folks think. Your crystal ball is probably about as good as mine.
It's worth noting in 2006 we all agreed to a pay agreement that was 1% in year 1, 0% in year 2, 3 & 4. The last pay agreement was 1.5% every 18 months for 3 years. That same agreement was worth about $42 million while this one is valued at over $110 million. Even if you count per capita value each year it's nearly double. As far as I can find we've never been offered a 2% scale raise and the 4 year timeline is low compared to other contracts. Long story short, it may not be enough, but it's certainly better than we've ever been offered.
As far as ALPA vs SAPA, man that is such a private question, nearly impossible to proselytize. ALPA does WAY more than we do on a national level however we don't have the conflict of interests at the regional level. We are paid by the company however nobody here pays dues. It's tough.
We have tried to emulate their best practices and recently got Loss of Medical insurance at a great rate for all pilots. We DO have Soft Landing for our sister carrier in place and are working on opening that up to anyone with 121 experience. It's my hope that is copied at other carriers and we can all carry over our experience from one airline to another, the beginnings of a national seniority list.
Guys, you're right, I do love my airline. I've been here 17 years (4 years on the SAPA EB) and I have no plans to go anywhere else. If that makes me a sell-out then so be it. Our management team does their best and, more often than not, are limited in what they can do by our business model. On the same hand, I try to get the most possible while maintaining our viability as an airline.. no easy task.
Anyway, I don't know if this pay package will pass or not. I have gotten a LOT of private support and seen very little public support, but that's always the case. If it fails I think we'll try again, who knows we may get more but I doubt it will be enough to offset the delays it takes to get there.
Just wanted to throw in my .02.
-Russ
This is Russ Jacobie, I think I've only posted here once or twice in the past but I wanted to log in and see what this forum thinks of the pay package and obviously read this thread.
It's good feedback! Honestly, it's interesting to see what folks think. Your crystal ball is probably about as good as mine.
It's worth noting in 2006 we all agreed to a pay agreement that was 1% in year 1, 0% in year 2, 3 & 4. The last pay agreement was 1.5% every 18 months for 3 years. That same agreement was worth about $42 million while this one is valued at over $110 million. Even if you count per capita value each year it's nearly double. As far as I can find we've never been offered a 2% scale raise and the 4 year timeline is low compared to other contracts. Long story short, it may not be enough, but it's certainly better than we've ever been offered.
As far as ALPA vs SAPA, man that is such a private question, nearly impossible to proselytize. ALPA does WAY more than we do on a national level however we don't have the conflict of interests at the regional level. We are paid by the company however nobody here pays dues. It's tough.
We have tried to emulate their best practices and recently got Loss of Medical insurance at a great rate for all pilots. We DO have Soft Landing for our sister carrier in place and are working on opening that up to anyone with 121 experience. It's my hope that is copied at other carriers and we can all carry over our experience from one airline to another, the beginnings of a national seniority list.
Guys, you're right, I do love my airline. I've been here 17 years (4 years on the SAPA EB) and I have no plans to go anywhere else. If that makes me a sell-out then so be it. Our management team does their best and, more often than not, are limited in what they can do by our business model. On the same hand, I try to get the most possible while maintaining our viability as an airline.. no easy task.
Anyway, I don't know if this pay package will pass or not. I have gotten a LOT of private support and seen very little public support, but that's always the case. If it fails I think we'll try again, who knows we may get more but I doubt it will be enough to offset the delays it takes to get there.
Just wanted to throw in my .02.
-Russ
06-07-2017, 06:47 AM
#427
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Guppy Gear Slinger
Posts: 2,019
We're voting on a terrible pay package based on rumors of possible new flying? That's it? Seriously?
SGU must be laughing themselves silly. At least in the past, they've tried to convince us that there was significant new flying dependent on the TA passing. Now, they're not even bothering with that. They think we're gullible enough to vote on rumors.
And if you believe that new flying is actually contingent just upon pilot pay, you either haven't been in this industry very long or you're just really clueless as to how these decisions get made. Does anyone not remember the scan whereby SGU convinced the pilot group to vote for a terrible pay package, because doing so would allow us to get the -700 airframe on property? And when it passed, barely an hour elapsed before the -700s were announced, complete with base assignments and pretty much everything else? That agreement was made long before the package was voted on.
Reading some of these 'Yes' vote posts just boggles the mind.
SGU must be laughing themselves silly. At least in the past, they've tried to convince us that there was significant new flying dependent on the TA passing. Now, they're not even bothering with that. They think we're gullible enough to vote on rumors.
And if you believe that new flying is actually contingent just upon pilot pay, you either haven't been in this industry very long or you're just really clueless as to how these decisions get made. Does anyone not remember the scan whereby SGU convinced the pilot group to vote for a terrible pay package, because doing so would allow us to get the -700 airframe on property? And when it passed, barely an hour elapsed before the -700s were announced, complete with base assignments and pretty much everything else? That agreement was made long before the package was voted on.
Reading some of these 'Yes' vote posts just boggles the mind.
06-07-2017, 06:54 AM
#428
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Guppy Gear Slinger
Posts: 2,019
Russ:
1. The pay package is a pay cut in real terms. It does not match the CPI rate of increase, even when you include the larger 401k match.
2. The only reason the pay package is bigger now ($110 vs $42M) is that the size of the pilot group is much larger. The $110 vs $42 comparison is meaningless. What matters is compensation per pilot, not the size of the total package.
3. At the very least, SGU should have a concrete possibility of new flying to discuss. They expect us to vote based on a rumour we heard from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy? Do they think we're that dumb? (Answer: yes, apparently).
4. The supply/demand curve has never been more tilted in favor of pilots than it is now. I've been flying professionally in one form or another since 1997, and I've never seen it this good. Yet you advocate we settle for what is a pay cut in real terms. Why?
Disappointed but not surprised to see that SAPA approved this for a vote.
1. The pay package is a pay cut in real terms. It does not match the CPI rate of increase, even when you include the larger 401k match.
2. The only reason the pay package is bigger now ($110 vs $42M) is that the size of the pilot group is much larger. The $110 vs $42 comparison is meaningless. What matters is compensation per pilot, not the size of the total package.
3. At the very least, SGU should have a concrete possibility of new flying to discuss. They expect us to vote based on a rumour we heard from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy? Do they think we're that dumb? (Answer: yes, apparently).
4. The supply/demand curve has never been more tilted in favor of pilots than it is now. I've been flying professionally in one form or another since 1997, and I've never seen it this good. Yet you advocate we settle for what is a pay cut in real terms. Why?
Disappointed but not surprised to see that SAPA approved this for a vote.
06-07-2017, 07:04 AM
#429
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 72
Hey all,
This is Russ Jacobie, I think I've only posted here once or twice in the past but I wanted to log in and see what this forum thinks of the pay package and obviously read this thread.
It's good feedback! Honestly, it's interesting to see what folks think. Your crystal ball is probably about as good as mine.
It's worth noting in 2006 we all agreed to a pay agreement that was 1% in year 1, 0% in year 2, 3 & 4. The last pay agreement was 1.5% every 18 months for 3 years. That same agreement was worth about $42 million while this one is valued at over $110 million. Even if you count per capita value each year it's nearly double. As far as I can find we've never been offered a 2% scale raise and the 4 year timeline is low compared to other contracts. Long story short, it may not be enough, but it's certainly better than we've ever been offered.
As far as ALPA vs SAPA, man that is such a private question, nearly impossible to proselytize. ALPA does WAY more than we do on a national level however we don't have the conflict of interests at the regional level. We are paid by the company however nobody here pays dues. It's tough.
We have tried to emulate their best practices and recently got Loss of Medical insurance at a great rate for all pilots. We DO have Soft Landing for our sister carrier in place and are working on opening that up to anyone with 121 experience. It's my hope that is copied at other carriers and we can all carry over our experience from one airline to another, the beginnings of a national seniority list.
Guys, you're right, I do love my airline. I've been here 17 years (4 years on the SAPA EB) and I have no plans to go anywhere else. If that makes me a sell-out then so be it. Our management team does their best and, more often than not, are limited in what they can do by our business model. On the same hand, I try to get the most possible while maintaining our viability as an airline.. no easy task.
Anyway, I don't know if this pay package will pass or not. I have gotten a LOT of private support and seen very little public support, but that's always the case. If it fails I think we'll try again, who knows we may get more but I doubt it will be enough to offset the delays it takes to get there.
Just wanted to throw in my .02.
-Russ
This is Russ Jacobie, I think I've only posted here once or twice in the past but I wanted to log in and see what this forum thinks of the pay package and obviously read this thread.
It's good feedback! Honestly, it's interesting to see what folks think. Your crystal ball is probably about as good as mine.
It's worth noting in 2006 we all agreed to a pay agreement that was 1% in year 1, 0% in year 2, 3 & 4. The last pay agreement was 1.5% every 18 months for 3 years. That same agreement was worth about $42 million while this one is valued at over $110 million. Even if you count per capita value each year it's nearly double. As far as I can find we've never been offered a 2% scale raise and the 4 year timeline is low compared to other contracts. Long story short, it may not be enough, but it's certainly better than we've ever been offered.
As far as ALPA vs SAPA, man that is such a private question, nearly impossible to proselytize. ALPA does WAY more than we do on a national level however we don't have the conflict of interests at the regional level. We are paid by the company however nobody here pays dues. It's tough.
We have tried to emulate their best practices and recently got Loss of Medical insurance at a great rate for all pilots. We DO have Soft Landing for our sister carrier in place and are working on opening that up to anyone with 121 experience. It's my hope that is copied at other carriers and we can all carry over our experience from one airline to another, the beginnings of a national seniority list.
Guys, you're right, I do love my airline. I've been here 17 years (4 years on the SAPA EB) and I have no plans to go anywhere else. If that makes me a sell-out then so be it. Our management team does their best and, more often than not, are limited in what they can do by our business model. On the same hand, I try to get the most possible while maintaining our viability as an airline.. no easy task.
Anyway, I don't know if this pay package will pass or not. I have gotten a LOT of private support and seen very little public support, but that's always the case. If it fails I think we'll try again, who knows we may get more but I doubt it will be enough to offset the delays it takes to get there.
Just wanted to throw in my .02.
-Russ
06-07-2017, 07:05 AM
#430
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,252
Russ:
1. The pay package is a pay cut in real terms. It does not match the CPI rate of increase, even when you include the larger 401k match.
2. The only reason the pay package is bigger now ($110 vs $42M) is that the size of the pilot group is much larger. The $110 vs $42 comparison is meaningless. What matters is compensation per pilot, not the size of the total package.
3. At the very least, SGU should have a concrete possibility of new flying to discuss. They expect us to vote based on a rumour we heard from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy? Do they think we're that dumb? (Answer: yes, apparently).
4. The supply/demand curve has never been more tilted in favor of pilots than it is now. I've been flying professionally in one form or another since 1997, and I've never seen it this good. Yet you advocate we settle for what is a pay cut in real terms. Why?
Disappointed but not surprised to see that SAPA approved this for a vote.
1. The pay package is a pay cut in real terms. It does not match the CPI rate of increase, even when you include the larger 401k match.
2. The only reason the pay package is bigger now ($110 vs $42M) is that the size of the pilot group is much larger. The $110 vs $42 comparison is meaningless. What matters is compensation per pilot, not the size of the total package.
3. At the very least, SGU should have a concrete possibility of new flying to discuss. They expect us to vote based on a rumour we heard from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy? Do they think we're that dumb? (Answer: yes, apparently).
4. The supply/demand curve has never been more tilted in favor of pilots than it is now. I've been flying professionally in one form or another since 1997, and I've never seen it this good. Yet you advocate we settle for what is a pay cut in real terms. Why?
Disappointed but not surprised to see that SAPA approved this for a vote.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
