Update on pay negotiations
Everything the company currently does is aimed at alleviating the current pilot shortage. And everything the company says is aimed at convincing us that there isn't a shortage.
A little history lesson....
Up until a few years ago the 747-400 used to have two crewrest "love seats" at the front of the upper deck. They were screened off from the rest of the cabin. A couple of years back management progressively removed the screens, although they assured us at the time that there would be no other changes to the rest seats. That was until they began to sell them on the short haul flights to increase revenue. No problem, we still had them for the ULH flights. Right up until now. With the new ULH business class product we now only have one crew rest seat. The idea was sold to us that there would be an economy seat reserved for the junior crew to take their rest in, but so far there has been no such thing. So, with a few small changes made over time the company got their way, at our expense.
Why your salary is about to be reduced in a tradeoff for higher Hourly Duty Pay:
Several years ago, Hourly Duty Pay (HDP) was introduced, apparently as an extra payment at the time. Most of us didn't miss the point that it was not made provident fundable. At present it forms a relatively small part of our overall pay. The problem with normal salaries is that during a downturn, or when pilots are being accrued for a fleet expansion, the productivity decreases, however the salary cost doesn't. Salaries, including holiday pay and provident fund contribution are all paid at the normal rate. It was "sold" to us (and lets face it, as an extra pay component it didn't take much selling) as a pay incentive to encourage and reward those who worked more - thereby perhaps cutting down on sickleave etc. But what is in it for the company and why the need to introduce an duty pay component ?
There is a high chance that over the next few years the component of hourly duty pay will increase as a result of negotiated pay rises, in lieu of an increase in basic salary. Take a situation in the future where only 50% of our normal paycheck is salary, and the rest is HDP. During a downturn when pilots are rostered to fly say only 25% of their usual monthly hours, their total monthly pay will only be around 63% of the usual monthly pay. It still leaves the company the ability to roster and pay overtime during an expansion, along with the ability to cut right back on pay during a downturn. And the HDP is not provident fundable, so it's a very effective way of subtly reducing provident fund contributions without negotiating it.
And many of you will also remember the not so subtle change, to make the housing allowance taxable a couple of years ago. It is now classed as part of your monthly pay, and called "salary". And for good reason. Given sufficient time for our memories to dull, it will gradually have the "housing allowance" designation removed completely, leaving the way clear to merge it with both hourly duty pay and basic salary.
How the company will offset the costs of a payrise:
The company have made their intent clear to introduce age 65 retirement. They have denied that they aim to introduce 3 man ULH, but this flies in the face of their recent proposal to CAD for 3 crew ULH, so we need to realise that it's simply a matter of "WHEN", not "IF". You see, 3 crew ULH is an easy one for them. If they put it to the vote, there are many pilots who will vote for it in return for an increase in the HDP payments. Anyone who currently flies 2 crew (B777 and A330) or 3 crew (B777 and A330 and Freighter) will be very likely to vote for an increase in HDP in return for 3 crew ULH - simply because there is no downside to them - they are already operating 3 crew anyway.
Everything the company currently does is aimed at alleviating the current pilot shortage. And everything the company says is aimed at convincing us that there isn't a shortage.