The question still remains
11-01-2011, 11:46 AM
#231
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 754
Because SWAPA's whole rationale for the 'seniority grab' was that the SWA pay rates made up for it.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
11-01-2011, 12:00 PM
#232
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: at your moms house...
Posts: 67
So what is the problem with that?
- AT pilots have argued that seniority is more important than pay. The SWA 717 new hires will be junior to every AT pilot.
- AT pilots were advocating a relative seniority system where a 6 year AT pilot (junior captain) would make more than a 10 year SWA pilot (senior FO).
- AT pilots have argued that if one group gets a large pay increase, that increase in no way harms the other group. Additionally, the group who gets no pay raise should not feel slighted at all.
Now, strangely, it seems to be a problem and inherently unfair when someone junior makes more money. I don't understand...
- AT pilots have argued that seniority is more important than pay. The SWA 717 new hires will be junior to every AT pilot.
- AT pilots were advocating a relative seniority system where a 6 year AT pilot (junior captain) would make more than a 10 year SWA pilot (senior FO).
- AT pilots have argued that if one group gets a large pay increase, that increase in no way harms the other group. Additionally, the group who gets no pay raise should not feel slighted at all.
Now, strangely, it seems to be a problem and inherently unfair when someone junior makes more money. I don't understand...
as far as someone junior making more than someone senior....take it up with SWA management...they are the ones that proposed both of these deals.....not the AT guys....
11-01-2011, 12:22 PM
#233
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 284
Because SWAPA's whole rationale for the 'seniority grab' was that the SWA pay rates made up for it.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
Why is it now unfair that a SWA pilot with 1 year could be paid more than a ATN pilot with 4 years?
11-01-2011, 12:28 PM
#234
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 754
ClipperJet,
I'll say it again. I've NEVER made the argument of seniority vs. pay. You seem to be confusing seniority with longevity. A pilot who has 13 months in the seat should not get paid more than a pilot with 60 months in the seat. Where those two pilots fall on the ISL is a completely different matter.
I'll say it again. I've NEVER made the argument of seniority vs. pay. You seem to be confusing seniority with longevity. A pilot who has 13 months in the seat should not get paid more than a pilot with 60 months in the seat. Where those two pilots fall on the ISL is a completely different matter.
11-01-2011, 02:43 PM
#235
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 284
ClipperJet,
I'll say it again. I've NEVER made the argument of seniority vs. pay. You seem to be confusing seniority with longevity. A pilot who has 13 months in the seat should not get paid more than a pilot with 60 months in the seat. Where those two pilots fall on the ISL is a completely different matter.
I'll say it again. I've NEVER made the argument of seniority vs. pay. You seem to be confusing seniority with longevity. A pilot who has 13 months in the seat should not get paid more than a pilot with 60 months in the seat. Where those two pilots fall on the ISL is a completely different matter.
This discussion started (at least when I jumped in) over the "B-scale" that ATN 717 pilots would endure for the next 3 years, and whether SWAPA should negotiate the ATN pilots wages up before 2015. That's precisely why the pay issue becomes relevant.
Longevity normally determines seniority. Seniority normally dictates CA vs FO. Captains normally make more than FOs. Normally, this all pretty easy. In this case, the lines are obviously very, very blurred.
It seems that many, on BOTH sides, are content when a pilot with less longevity makes more money when it favors their side, but are not happy when it works against their side. (BTW, both SWA and ATN folks are guilty of this...)
11-01-2011, 02:55 PM
#236
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 754
Longevity and seniority rarely stay the same during a pilots career. Furloughs, mergers, LOA's all make sure those two things diverge.
The SWAPA guys were never gaining longevity, merely relative seniority.
11-01-2011, 02:58 PM
#237
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
Because SWAPA's whole rationale for the 'seniority grab' was that the SWA pay rates made up for it.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
Now, there is no SWA pay for the vast majority of ATN guys (for 3 years), but we are still losing, on average, 30% of our seniority.
BTW- I was never one who argued seniority vs. pay rates. I still don't.
AT Capt with say 12 years bids over to the SWA side. He will be paid for his longevity at AT. The SWA pilot just above him on the list will be paid for his own longevity. Therefor the AT pilot could easily be making $30/trip more than the SWA dude immediately senior to him.
The scenario I just described WILL happen. The scenario you described MIGHT happen.
Honest question: do you think SWA is really going to send new hires to the 717?
11-01-2011, 03:27 PM
#238
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 737n/FO
Posts: 667
Same thing is happening on the SWA side.
AT Capt with say 12 years bids over to the SWA side. He will be paid for his longevity at AT. The SWA pilot just above him on the list will be paid for his own longevity. Therefor the AT pilot could easily be making $30/trip more than the SWA dude immediately senior to him.
The scenario I just described WILL happen. The scenario you described MIGHT happen.
Honest question: do you think SWA is really going to send new hires to the 717?
AT Capt with say 12 years bids over to the SWA side. He will be paid for his longevity at AT. The SWA pilot just above him on the list will be paid for his own longevity. Therefor the AT pilot could easily be making $30/trip more than the SWA dude immediately senior to him.
The scenario I just described WILL happen. The scenario you described MIGHT happen.
Honest question: do you think SWA is really going to send new hires to the 717?
Also, my most curious question at this point is whether/by how much ATN ALPA and SWAPA pass/vote down the actual agreement. While I think ATN may pass it because of the implied/real threats to their jobs, what happens to the SWAPA side (if it's a really bad deal then it should either fail to pass or pass by a small minority). Just askin'
11-01-2011, 03:35 PM
#240
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 754
1Seat,
I agree. I think the new-hire 717 is extremely unlikely with enough time for the whole 'b-scale' concept to be a reality.
BTW- I spoke with an MC member today about this. He said two members of the Negotiating Committee are in Dallas to get clarification on the pay rate issue. My source said he was in the room during the negotiation of that section and it's intent was only to apply in the event of a furlough.
I agree. I think the new-hire 717 is extremely unlikely with enough time for the whole 'b-scale' concept to be a reality.
BTW- I spoke with an MC member today about this. He said two members of the Negotiating Committee are in Dallas to get clarification on the pay rate issue. My source said he was in the room during the negotiation of that section and it's intent was only to apply in the event of a furlough.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
