Search

Notices

767-400 ual

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-07-2014, 08:42 AM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Default

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer
Respectfully disagree.

Its not nonsense. Its fact. Read the SLI hearings. They SPECIFICALLY asked the arbitrators to count CAL 767-400 as a jumbo and UALs 757s as narrowbody because of pay banding. That right there PROVED why they did it. They were trying to massage the status and category weighting with OUR contract. This was specifically asked at a union meeting where the union LEC rep said "We are doing this for SLI purposes because contracts come and go but SLI lasts forever" which was taped by a Uhire who was in the meeting.

If pay banding is what "DAL" does then why does DAL pay Airbus more than guppy? And DAL certainly pays 757 more than guppy. Also NO AIRLINE bands 747s and 777s with 767s. Except us.

The creative pay banding was an SLI argument supporter, it failed the Status and Category sniff test, and now we have guys getting paid less than they should in the 757, 777, and 747s. So the reasons for the pay banding are moot because they didn't accomplish what was intended.
Everything I stated as fact is just that... indisputable fact. DAL does have more paybands and bands the 757 and 763 (the A320 actually pays less than the 73, but that wouldn't fly). IMO (opinion) both sides wanted to frame the pay rates to advantage their pilots knowing the current fleets. Bottom line, lobby your reps when we get close to openers... that's as much control as we have.
XHooker is offline  
Old 12-07-2014, 09:22 AM
  #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
Default

Originally Posted by XHooker
IMO (opinion) both sides wanted to frame the pay rates to advantage their pilots knowing the current fleets. Bottom line, lobby your reps when we get close to openers... that's as much control as we have.
No. UALs SLI argument was always Jumbo, Mid, Narrow, Furloughed. It never had anything to do with hourly rates of airplanes.

And Delta has 767-400 in a LOWER pay band than the 787 which is in a LOWER pay band than the 777 and 747. Ours are all in the same pay band.

And guess what else? ALL our premium pay aircraft pay the same as the DAL 767-400 and DAL pays 787, 777, and 747 MORE.

Because those higher paying equipment were pay banded DOWN to match the 767-400. So when guys say "Its good that more pilots get paid at the highest rate" they clearly don't understand how and why this transpired.
pilot64golfer is offline  
Old 12-07-2014, 09:42 AM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Default

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer
No. UALs SLI argument was always Jumbo, Mid, Narrow, Furloughed. It never had anything to do with hourly rates of airplanes.

And Delta has 767-400 in a LOWER pay band than the 787 which is in a LOWER pay band than the 777 and 747. Ours are all in the same pay band.

And guess what else? ALL our premium pay aircraft pay the same as the DAL 767-400 and DAL pays 787, 777, and 747 MORE.

Because those higher paying equipment were pay banded DOWN to match the 767-400. So when guys say "Its good that more pilots get paid at the highest rate" they clearly don't understand how and why this transpired.
The pie doesn't get bigger or smaller based on paybands, it's just divided differently. If you want to unband everything, lobby your reps. Personally, considering the direction of the airline and industry away from the 747/A380 capacity planes, I think that would be unwise. You see it differently.
XHooker is offline  
Old 12-07-2014, 01:32 PM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Sunvox's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: EWR 777 Captain
Posts: 1,715
Default

my bad deleted
Sunvox is offline  
Old 12-08-2014, 02:59 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 303
Default

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer
With a gun to our heads. Yes that one.
.
Scrappy is offline  
Old 12-10-2014, 08:23 PM
  #46  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 65
Default

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer
No. UALs SLI argument was always Jumbo, Mid, Narrow, Furloughed. It never had anything to do with hourly rates of airplanes.

And Delta has 767-400 in a LOWER pay band than the 787 which is in a LOWER pay band than the 777 and 747. Ours are all in the same pay band.

And guess what else? ALL our premium pay aircraft pay the same as the DAL 767-400 and DAL pays 787, 777, and 747 MORE.

Because those higher paying equipment were pay banded DOWN to match the 767-400. So when guys say "Its good that more pilots get paid at the highest rate" they clearly don't understand how and why this transpired.
How many times do we have to cover this for YOU?

UAL rates will always lag the Delta rates by one year. That is how our rates were established.

If you actually compared the UAL 2014 rates to the DAL 2013 you would know that the 747/777 rates are EQUAL.

The 767-400 and 787 are banded UP and pay more than Delta. More importantly the A320 rates is banded UP with the 737 and are SIGNIFICANTLY more than Delta. You never seem very upset by that fact.

To say the 400 747-400 pilots somehow got less from the pay banding is ridiculous. They got Delta -1 year like every other pilot at UAL.

You SHOULD be outraged about the 757/767 pay rates. Those rates lag the Delta -1 year by a pretty good margin. The 76T/756 guys should be the ones that are ****ed off.
AV82SKI is offline  
Old 12-22-2014, 10:26 PM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 777
Posts: 2,173
Default

Originally Posted by AV82SKI
You SHOULD be outraged about the 757/767 pay rates. Those rates lag the Delta -1 year by a pretty good margin. The 76T/756 guys should be the ones that are ****ed off.
Yes I was.....though the bus guys did get a fair raise. Then to top it all off, the west coast 757's took a pay cut from the combined rates when CCS was finally able to discriminate the 757's from 767-400's. You see, we never saw much in the way of 767's in the west.
Dave Fitzgerald is offline  
Old 12-23-2014, 09:21 AM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,265
Default

How do the powers that be decide on what the pay rate for a certain airplane should be? If going off seat count the 787-8 should be paying the same as the 762 and 763, or vice versa. Same for the 739 and 752.
Grumble is offline  
Old 12-23-2014, 09:45 AM
  #49  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble
How do the powers that be decide on what the pay rate for a certain airplane should be? If going off seat count the 787-8 should be paying the same as the 762 and 763, or vice versa. Same for the 739 and 752.
There's no real formula. It's up to the discretion of the NC and ultimately MEC. Generally, weight supersedes seats because seats are variable (extreme case, imagine if we had WB freighters... we wouldn't accept SNB pay for them). In the present era, mission (long haul vs. domestic), common types (757/767), and evaluating future replacement aircraft are additional factors.
XHooker is offline  
Old 12-23-2014, 09:57 AM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cadetdrivr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Default

Originally Posted by XHooker
There's no real formula. It's up to the discretion of the NC and ultimately MEC. Generally, weight supersedes seats because seats are variable (extreme case, imagine if we had WB freighters... we wouldn't accept SNB pay for them).
And sometimes it's just politics or ulterior motives.
cadetdrivr is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EZBW
United
131
05-04-2017 09:19 PM
Sunvox
United
113
05-04-2013 09:04 AM
steamgauge
Cargo
95
03-24-2013 06:55 PM
Regularguy
United
57
03-12-2012 05:46 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices