We're far behind, can demand more
03-27-2023, 03:29 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,264
We're far behind, can demand more
I put together this set of Delta vs SWA compensation snapshots. Sorry about the sizing of the graphic. I played around with it but couldn't quite get it right. At first it was too small to read. And now, maybe it's too big, but it's readable. If you scroll down through it, it should provide you with the info.
It incorporates 8, 15, and 30 year comparisons with various upgrade scenarios modeled (including the flipping of the current upgrade situations at Delta and SWA). It also includes two 10-year looks at the difference in compensation on 12-yr CA pay. Delta handily beats us in all scenarios. I used 6.5 years for the SWA upgrade which is a little better than what is currently available at SWA and I used 1 year for the 767-300/200 upgrades and four years for the scenarios with upgrades to the 737-800/700. If you have any questions about the specific upgrade scenario modeled in the chart, just look at the legend. It specifically details the upgrade progressions used.
The second section is a selection of quotes from various RLA federal court cases over the years that should leave little doubt in your mind that the RLA does not require us to confine our demands to the realm of narrow-body rates. The quotes also confirm that we don't need to move toward the position of the company. And that we can be "hard," "intransigent," and "greedy" without violating the RLA. And I'm not saying that it's wise, but the RLA even allows us to demand wages that could bankrupt the company (see the quote from the REA Express case in the graphic).
The final section is a look at the difference in monthly block hours flown between SWA and Delta. Surprise: Delta blocks fewer hours per month than we do. And they are paid more than SWA pilots.
Call, email your reps and let them know you're aware that the RLA does not prohibit us from demanding wide-body or even wide-body-plus rates. Let them know you'd like them to pursue the best possible compensation, retirement, work rules, and benefits, unrestrained by any sort of need to limit ourselves to narrow-bodyish boundaries, especially now that you realize that the RLA does not hold us back from demanding the very best in each one of those areas. Let them know that you know that it's not too late to change our demands as conditions change. That's what the courts have said (see the TWA case in the graphic).
It incorporates 8, 15, and 30 year comparisons with various upgrade scenarios modeled (including the flipping of the current upgrade situations at Delta and SWA). It also includes two 10-year looks at the difference in compensation on 12-yr CA pay. Delta handily beats us in all scenarios. I used 6.5 years for the SWA upgrade which is a little better than what is currently available at SWA and I used 1 year for the 767-300/200 upgrades and four years for the scenarios with upgrades to the 737-800/700. If you have any questions about the specific upgrade scenario modeled in the chart, just look at the legend. It specifically details the upgrade progressions used.
The second section is a selection of quotes from various RLA federal court cases over the years that should leave little doubt in your mind that the RLA does not require us to confine our demands to the realm of narrow-body rates. The quotes also confirm that we don't need to move toward the position of the company. And that we can be "hard," "intransigent," and "greedy" without violating the RLA. And I'm not saying that it's wise, but the RLA even allows us to demand wages that could bankrupt the company (see the quote from the REA Express case in the graphic).
The final section is a look at the difference in monthly block hours flown between SWA and Delta. Surprise: Delta blocks fewer hours per month than we do. And they are paid more than SWA pilots.
Call, email your reps and let them know you're aware that the RLA does not prohibit us from demanding wide-body or even wide-body-plus rates. Let them know you'd like them to pursue the best possible compensation, retirement, work rules, and benefits, unrestrained by any sort of need to limit ourselves to narrow-bodyish boundaries, especially now that you realize that the RLA does not hold us back from demanding the very best in each one of those areas. Let them know that you know that it's not too late to change our demands as conditions change. That's what the courts have said (see the TWA case in the graphic).
03-27-2023, 05:08 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 332
I put together this set of Delta vs SWA compensation snapshots. Sorry about the sizing of the graphic. I played around with it but couldn't quite get it right. At first it was too small to read. And now, maybe it's too big, but it's readable. If you scroll down through it, it should provide you with the info.
It incorporates 8, 15, and 30 year comparisons with various upgrade scenarios modeled (including the flipping of the current upgrade situations at Delta and SWA). It also includes two 10-year looks at the difference in compensation on 12-yr CA pay. Delta handily beats us in all scenarios. I used 6.5 years for the SWA upgrade which is a little better than what is currently available at SWA and I used 1 year for the 767-300/200 upgrades and four years for the scenarios with upgrades to the 737-800/700. If you have any questions about the specific upgrade scenario modeled in the chart, just look at the legend. It specifically details the upgrade progressions used.
The second section is a selection of quotes from various RLA federal court cases over the years that should leave little doubt in your mind that the RLA does not require us to confine our demands to the realm of narrow-body rates. The quotes also confirm that we don't need to move toward the position of the company. And that we can be "hard," "intransigent," and "greedy" without violating the RLA. And I'm not saying that it's wise, but the RLA even allows us to demand wages that could bankrupt the company (see the quote from the REA Express case in the graphic).
The final section is a look at the difference in monthly block hours flown between SWA and Delta. Surprise: Delta blocks fewer hours per month than we do. And they are paid more than SWA pilots.
Call, email your reps and let them know you're aware that the RLA does not prohibit us from demanding wide-body or even wide-body-plus rates. Let them know you'd like them to pursue the best possible compensation, retirement, work rules, and benefits, unrestrained by any sort of need to limit ourselves to narrow-bodyish boundaries, especially now that you realize that the RLA does not hold us back from demanding the very best in each one of those areas. Let them know that you know that it's not too late to change our demands as conditions change. That's what the courts have said (see the TWA case in the graphic).
It incorporates 8, 15, and 30 year comparisons with various upgrade scenarios modeled (including the flipping of the current upgrade situations at Delta and SWA). It also includes two 10-year looks at the difference in compensation on 12-yr CA pay. Delta handily beats us in all scenarios. I used 6.5 years for the SWA upgrade which is a little better than what is currently available at SWA and I used 1 year for the 767-300/200 upgrades and four years for the scenarios with upgrades to the 737-800/700. If you have any questions about the specific upgrade scenario modeled in the chart, just look at the legend. It specifically details the upgrade progressions used.
The second section is a selection of quotes from various RLA federal court cases over the years that should leave little doubt in your mind that the RLA does not require us to confine our demands to the realm of narrow-body rates. The quotes also confirm that we don't need to move toward the position of the company. And that we can be "hard," "intransigent," and "greedy" without violating the RLA. And I'm not saying that it's wise, but the RLA even allows us to demand wages that could bankrupt the company (see the quote from the REA Express case in the graphic).
The final section is a look at the difference in monthly block hours flown between SWA and Delta. Surprise: Delta blocks fewer hours per month than we do. And they are paid more than SWA pilots.
Call, email your reps and let them know you're aware that the RLA does not prohibit us from demanding wide-body or even wide-body-plus rates. Let them know you'd like them to pursue the best possible compensation, retirement, work rules, and benefits, unrestrained by any sort of need to limit ourselves to narrow-bodyish boundaries, especially now that you realize that the RLA does not hold us back from demanding the very best in each one of those areas. Let them know that you know that it's not too late to change our demands as conditions change. That's what the courts have said (see the TWA case in the graphic).
03-27-2023, 10:26 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,264
This is the kind of communication that should be pouring out continually from a union that just increased dues and are in the heat of battle on contract negotiations. This is far more effective than paying for dinner and booze if you attend a rally. Excellent product! The best that I’ve seen! Thanks for producing this. Did you send it to the swapa executives and all members of the BOD?
03-27-2023, 11:45 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,778
Lew you are a treasure to this pilot group and I want to personally thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into all of this education. I wish our union leaders would be more communicative with things like this instead of beating the 1.1 pilots per day thing. Hard to get worked up about 28 pilots when comparing to 10,000 of them, however looking down the barrel of millions of dollars in lost earnings is way more powerful. Please dont let the naysayers stop you.
03-27-2023, 02:55 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,264
One of the rationalizations I’ve always heard at SWA is that it’s okay that our rates aren’t so good because we make more per day than places like Delta and thus, fly fewer days per month than the OAL’s.
A little while back I started a thread over on the Delta forum asking about average number of days worked per month. I was looking for objective data. But mostly I got a lot of subjective data: 99 replies so far.
The gist seems to be that they don’t really, on average, seem to fly more days per month than us. Of course, it varies with fleet type and like here, with seniority and with reserve status. But it seems like it’s mostly a myth that we really fly much less, in terms of days per month, than they do.
It would be great to get truly objective pilot-group-wide data on the question of days worked per month in order to truly settle the question. Unfortunately, the unions appear to keep a tight grip on that data.
A little while back I started a thread over on the Delta forum asking about average number of days worked per month. I was looking for objective data. But mostly I got a lot of subjective data: 99 replies so far.
The gist seems to be that they don’t really, on average, seem to fly more days per month than us. Of course, it varies with fleet type and like here, with seniority and with reserve status. But it seems like it’s mostly a myth that we really fly much less, in terms of days per month, than they do.
It would be great to get truly objective pilot-group-wide data on the question of days worked per month in order to truly settle the question. Unfortunately, the unions appear to keep a tight grip on that data.
