Right now we have around 400 B scale CNs. The savings, versus A scale, are around $140million per year on a budget for FOPs of well over $2billion for pilot salaries. That $140million would pay for almost 300SOs and 300FOs to receive bypass pay this year. So before voting on any 'compromise' to help CX save money on the onerous bypass bill they will have, keep that figure in mind - or the $7billion profit. I am sure all the money they take off pilots in reduced profit share, for being sick last year, would pay for a few pilots bypass pay as well!
RA65 may be inevitable in some jurisdictions but to change the rules of the game in the middle of the game, without compensation, is unethical. All past CoS changes have been applied to new joiners not to current employees. If they want RA65 then ensure they don't financially penalise current employees.
Its a simple mathematical equation....does the opportunity cost of 'lost opportunities' exceed the cost of fair and equitable bypass pay.
ST says we don't want to run the "...risk of disadvantaging a large proportion of our number" by discussing pay before NRA. We have around 2300 pilots and about 50 per year due to reach 55 over the next decade. So I suggest that maybe the 'majority' of 98% not reaching 55 this year might disagree with the importance of discussing NRA before pay to help the 2% due to reach 55 this year!
Yes we will all reach 55 one day...but I would like to think that none of us would accept financial gain at the pecuniary loss to our junior colleagues. It is up to the most senior of us to ensure that any transition to RA65 is done fairly.