Hoolio
5th Aug 2007, 10:03
Ok guys, no more freighter vs pax fleet vs. ASL, A scale vs. B scale etc etc.
All these divisive attitudes don't serve any of our interests. While we bicker like children the company whittles away everyones COS. The ONLY way we will accomplish anything that benefits any of us is to start standing up for each other. If a deal comes out that is crap for you but good for me, I need to vote it down. Next time around you do the same to help protect me. Together we can make the AOA actually worth the dues we all pay. There has been a lot of bad blood in the past and no doubt, issues will arise in the future, but we have more important issues to deal with right now.
Lets try to actually get a reasonable discussion of what we should be paid in exchange for what the company wants.
This "round of talks" has nothing to do with pay from the companies perspective. The pay issue is a distraction from the real issue of retirement age 65.
Age 65 represents a huge disadvantage for all crew who are not already wearing 4 bars. The company argument that we are training limited on expansion is ridiculous. They can promote new training captains and promote new line captains at will. It just costs them more so they would like to avoid it. The planes are coming. Period. They are just fishing to see if we are stupid enough to pay for the expansion out of our own salaries.
If they truly are limited in growth and there is no solution but to extend the retirement age, then it sure as hell is worth more to them than a paltry 8% raise! Do not throw away our perfect negotiating position for nothing!
They will banter silly things about like "age discrimination" and
"future legislation".......
In the future legislation may or may not come. The company WANTS age 65. That disadvantages our junior pilots. They need to pay for it. For a mid seniority F/O, the pay raise, just to break even, is well into the double digits. Anything less than 15 or 20% on the F/O scale will amount to a pay cut.
There is a large loss in total income between wherever you are now on the pay scale and age 55, if your command is delayed even 1 year. With the expansion, the math they will try to show you uses a faster expansion but don't be fooled. A faster expansion should mean a quicker command and better career earnings, not giving away total income.
Compare apples to apples. Planned airplanes coming with and without 65. Only variable changed is the 55 to 65 retirement. The lifetime earnings difference is huge!
Look at your career based on an 8 yr total command as it is now and see what it would be like if you added 4,5,6 or more years to it. If the industry stagnates 5 years from now you could be stuck as a senior F/O and not make the left seat for even longer.
The talk of bypass pay is also empty rhetoric. It is currently being demonstrated by the way they are promoting in house S/O's. Guys who have 3 years here are "not assessed" until the last second before they are needed so no bypass pay is paid. Meanwhile DEFO's are being hired without restriction to save the company training money.
We have all seen the pattern before. We vote down the first proposal, even though the GC is campaigning hard for it.
The company threatens a horrendously worse deal.
We all run back to the first deal thinking how smart we are.
....it is better than nothing.....
.....if we don't vote it through they will just impose it.......
.....the company is just too strong to negotiate with....
.....everyone just serves there own interest so I will too....
ENOUGH ALREADY!!
Can we give this self defeatist pattern a break? How about if the deal sucks, we vote no. And if necessary, Vote no to the same( or very similar) deal again.
This way the GC can actually have some teeth when they sit at the negotiating table and say, the guys won't accept this.
Lets not be led around by the nose anymore.
All these divisive attitudes don't serve any of our interests. While we bicker like children the company whittles away everyones COS. The ONLY way we will accomplish anything that benefits any of us is to start standing up for each other. If a deal comes out that is crap for you but good for me, I need to vote it down. Next time around you do the same to help protect me. Together we can make the AOA actually worth the dues we all pay. There has been a lot of bad blood in the past and no doubt, issues will arise in the future, but we have more important issues to deal with right now.
Lets try to actually get a reasonable discussion of what we should be paid in exchange for what the company wants.
This "round of talks" has nothing to do with pay from the companies perspective. The pay issue is a distraction from the real issue of retirement age 65.
Age 65 represents a huge disadvantage for all crew who are not already wearing 4 bars. The company argument that we are training limited on expansion is ridiculous. They can promote new training captains and promote new line captains at will. It just costs them more so they would like to avoid it. The planes are coming. Period. They are just fishing to see if we are stupid enough to pay for the expansion out of our own salaries.
If they truly are limited in growth and there is no solution but to extend the retirement age, then it sure as hell is worth more to them than a paltry 8% raise! Do not throw away our perfect negotiating position for nothing!
They will banter silly things about like "age discrimination" and
"future legislation".......
In the future legislation may or may not come. The company WANTS age 65. That disadvantages our junior pilots. They need to pay for it. For a mid seniority F/O, the pay raise, just to break even, is well into the double digits. Anything less than 15 or 20% on the F/O scale will amount to a pay cut.
There is a large loss in total income between wherever you are now on the pay scale and age 55, if your command is delayed even 1 year. With the expansion, the math they will try to show you uses a faster expansion but don't be fooled. A faster expansion should mean a quicker command and better career earnings, not giving away total income.
Compare apples to apples. Planned airplanes coming with and without 65. Only variable changed is the 55 to 65 retirement. The lifetime earnings difference is huge!
Look at your career based on an 8 yr total command as it is now and see what it would be like if you added 4,5,6 or more years to it. If the industry stagnates 5 years from now you could be stuck as a senior F/O and not make the left seat for even longer.
The talk of bypass pay is also empty rhetoric. It is currently being demonstrated by the way they are promoting in house S/O's. Guys who have 3 years here are "not assessed" until the last second before they are needed so no bypass pay is paid. Meanwhile DEFO's are being hired without restriction to save the company training money.
We have all seen the pattern before. We vote down the first proposal, even though the GC is campaigning hard for it.
The company threatens a horrendously worse deal.
We all run back to the first deal thinking how smart we are.
....it is better than nothing.....
.....if we don't vote it through they will just impose it.......
.....the company is just too strong to negotiate with....
.....everyone just serves there own interest so I will too....
ENOUGH ALREADY!!
Can we give this self defeatist pattern a break? How about if the deal sucks, we vote no. And if necessary, Vote no to the same( or very similar) deal again.
This way the GC can actually have some teeth when they sit at the negotiating table and say, the guys won't accept this.
Lets not be led around by the nose anymore.