Otterbox

When intentionally altering the pay ratio away from the status quo to give one group of people more money at the expense of the other group, it’s not different. Collectively, Captains would complain endlessly about how they’re getting screwed again if UALPA leadership went the other direction and wanted to adjust the ratio to give FOs more % to bring them inline with SWA, UPS and FedEx (those companies use those higher FO % as a motivator to reduce training expenses) instead of giving Captains a larger $/hr.

horrido27

Think (I know, ballsy move!) that we can agree on one thing-
no matter what the payrate/ratio is, there will be ****ed off pilots!!

If memory serves me correct (and I’m sure I’ll be corrected if not-) back in 2012 when we voted on the current UPA, there were some groups that made out really well, and other that just made out with a handful that can claim they didn’t make out at all.
(Airbus pilots doing very well.. CAL 762 pilots not so much and ... UAL 400/Whale pilots.. eh?!)

But one thing is very clear RIGHT NOW-
A WB FO at 12+ yr can upgrade and be a line holder on a NB.
BUT-
WB FO 12yr = $252.36 (plus maybe 4.50 international override)
x 70 hours = $17665.30
probably 18 days off based on
3 Four Day trips or 4 Three Day Trips.
And can pick up a trip if they want.. or maybe get FBO’d and double dip.

IF they choose to be a 73/guppy Capt - $297.38 (maybe $6 international override)
x 80 hours = $23790.40
BUT
not getting 18 days off (probably) and definitely working more + harder.

Obviously, many of them are not looking to upgrade even though it’s over 6k a month difference, but probably a bit less.

On the post merger side it gets even more interesting..
NB FO 2yr = $147.18
NB FO 3yr = $172.18
but in both cases, they are probably lineholders at 85 hours and have some control over their life & schedule.
$12510.30 and $14635.30 respectively

IF they took an upgrade!
NB Capt 2yr = $275.09
NB Capt 3yr = $277.27
but now is where it gets complicated as they will be on reserve, 12 days off and dealing with our awful reserve rules.
Also, looking at 73hrs pay-
$20081.57 and $20240.71.

THEY have made a statement that they value Quality of Life over money.

We will see what the “fix” is, in a few months. But just like the suites destroyed this profession back in the 90’s and 2000’s, we have a chance to correct it and make it an worthwhile financial career going forward.

Motch

Aztecsfight

Freeze all checkairmen trips from PBS close till 5 days before a trip.
That’s how you make your Captains and leave the percentages alone.

hummingbear

The assumption that it comes at the cost of the FOs is where communication is being lost. I don’t want to rob Peter to pay Paul, but I believe we could dig up a little extra for CAs if we came at the company from the right angle. Unfortunately it’s probably a non-starter for enough people that it isn’t worth pursuing.

If you would vote for say 25%, but not 30/25, ask yourself if you’re being logical or emotional.

ThumbsUp

That is robbing Peter to pay Paul. If it was 30/25, it could be in the neighborhood of 29/29 for the same contractual value, just due to the pay differential in the rates. Just to solve a company problem. Poor Peter.

hummingbear

See this is where you’re missing my point. It couldn’t be 29/29 (these are all hypothetical numbers) because the company isn’t willing to put that much money into pay rates that do nothing to solve their problem, where they might spend more toward a solution. Do you see what I’m saying?

Assume we negotiate the best possible rate at 25%. Then we go on & tell the company “An additional 5% on the CA scales will help alleviate your upgrade problem.” Thus, we take advantage of present circumstances to gain more money for some that wasn’t available to all. Sounds like good negotiating sense to me, but some will always turn it down because “30/20 should have been straight 25, 35/25 should have been 30, etc.” Essentially, we’re telling the CAs, “you have to accept less because to negotiate as much as we can for you would hurt other people’s feelings.”

Ironically, the FOs who subscribe to this philosophy rob themselves, too, once they eventually upgrade.

ninerdriver

A significant number of the 737 captains who were upgrading while I was in the schoolhouse had fifteen years here.

Any of us FOs who are 40+ and subscribe to this philosophy want to see our share for all 25 or less years that we're here, not just the final 10 or less. That's not hurt feelings. It's just business.

ThumbsUp

I understand what you are trying to say, but you are missing the basic math. A common increase of 25% across the board is inherently a larger increase for captains because they make more money. So to say CA’s are going to get an additional percentage increase further widening the gap doesn’t seem like sound logic. We are just numbers on a spreadsheet. If the company is willing to give 30/25, they would do 29/29 if those numbers came out to the same bottom line.

dmeg13021

What he is saying is if we use our capital to negotiate 25/25, then company might say, we’ll throw some more on top to incentivize upgrades and say 30/25. The collective part of CBA says “then give us 29/29” and the company says nope. So you end up with 25/25 cuz “fair”.

Guppydriver95

And if a stalemate occurs, we demand that the extra that they were willing to pay be applied elsewhere in the contract, since they just acknowledged that the money is there. If not, see ya on the picket line! That’s where unity, resolve, and leadership come in. (See 94% no and GT as MC)