VB's Embraer Poor Cousins

[Blue-Footed Boobie]

Not 100% sure of all the facts here so I'll tread lightly, I prommise!

I read in another post that the E190 crews will be paid much less than the 737 crews so I can't see any justification as a non-trained accountant as to why the flightcrew about to fly VB's shinning new E190/195's should be on such a reduced wicket ?

They will fly the same VB pax, most likely the same yearly total of hours, wear the same uniform?? drink piss in the same bar, etc etc. So they carry 70 pax less but the pilots didn't choose to buy the Embraers, that was a commercial decision on behalf of the company so why discriminate against those who will fly it (still treading lightly here :})

Blue Foot

[Dehavillanddriver]

For exactly the same reason that people flying barons and other light twins get paid less - if you use your logic all pilots will be paid the same regardless of type.

The same arguement can be made to pay the widebody pilots less - you cant have it both ways.

It really comes down to the earnings capacity of the aircraft. Aircraft with less seats generate less revenue - Pilot unions have argued exactly that case since Pontious was a cadet pilot (but from the bigger aeroplanes generate more revenue so pay us more perspective)

Pilots flying the 737 in Virgin are not going to be disadvantaged by the Embraer introduction, F/O's can get a command if they want one but no-one is going to force them

In an ideal world we would all be paid squillions to fly Cessna 150's but that world doesnt exist (and never did), all in all it means more jet jobs and more progression which cannot be a bad thing can it?

[SilverSleuth]

Dehav, I think comparing a baron etc to flying a jet is a bit away from what Blue foot is getting at. Infact there is a lot of debate going on at the moment on this subject at DJ.
At the moment the virgin guys realise that this aircraft (The EMB 190) is 2 meters longer than the 700, more advanced flight deck/systems, flies faster if need be. It is the same CAT as the 700, flying the same routes, pilots the same hours, same responsability. This is one of a number of reasons why the EBA being voted on at the moment will more than likely be voted down. Had they bought the 737 600 which seats the same as the 190 there would be no issue on pay as its the same AC. Its just because its a different type they are using it to introduce a B scale fleet pay. Which has already been done with new FOs on the 737 who are now on a B scale also.
As far as the crewing goes yes no one is forcing anyone (yet) but the 20 or 30 senior FOs that they have ear marked for commands on it, all have said thanks but no thanks.
This A/C is certainly not a small regional jet. Anyone who has seen it parked next to a 73 when it was here whould know that.
Just for interest here are some specs
737 700:
length:33.6 m
height:12.5 m
cruise:0.785 Mach
EMB 190:
length:36.24m
height:10.57m
cruise:0.78 mach
so comparing it to a baron yes maybe the same pay etc not needed/justified however comparing it to a 73 and calling it a small regional ....well i think its speaks for itself.

[coaldemon]

Maybe the same size and complexity as a 737 but doesn't the Embraer carry 25- 30% less people? From a revenue point of view that is the crux of the matter.

[Defenestrator]

What are you lads on about. Revenue is completely relative to operating cost. I gather we are refering to "net" revenue.
but doesn't the Embraer carry 25- 30% less people? From a revenue point of view that is the crux of the matter.
Fair enough. BUT, if the operating cost of the embraer is 25-30% less than the 737 would that not put them on the same page? Now I don't know the figures but Embraer are flogging this thing as lowest operating cost in the class. That being the case and it being the first of type in OZ I'm tipping VB got a bloody good deal. But I digress, looks to me like horses for courses. Boeing carries more but costs more. Embraer carries less but costs less. Now you and I mightn't be accountants but it's not rocket science. I won't even start on the yield side of things.
In a nutshell the bar is being lowered yet again. I'm saddened to hear that a B scale pay has been introduced. So what's the start money now compared to the original salary?

[Gnadenburg]

Fleet pay is not an uncommon practice outside of Australia ( across the board wage consistancy despite a/c type ).

May have some advantages too- locking a fixed cost base into negotiations for access to upcoming Virgin long haul flying.

[goddamit]

Fleet pay is a two edged sword. Good for EMB drivers not so good when wide bodies get introduced. Can't have your cake & eat it too. Those wanting fleet pay will be the same people who want to change it in the future. EMBs work out at approx 80% of the pax capacity of the -700, so does the pay. That can be looked at as fair. But before I get shot down this shouldn't get focused on the EMB fleet, it simply highlights the low pay for the present 737 & A320drivers from both companies. If the company regards pay vs capacity then the bottom rung ie EMB FOs should be on a better wicket & everything above pushed up with it.

[UnderneathTheRadar]

BUT, if the operating cost of the embraer is 25-30% less than the 737 would that not put them on the same page?

Operating cost includes cost of flight crew - lower pay = lower flight crew costs.

(Not disagreeing with the general thrust that fleet pay should be considered - especially as the widebodies will end up with a different company therefore their crews won't be disadvantaged necessarily)

UTR

[Mudgie]

Silver Slueth
"Which has already been done with new FOs on the 737 who are now on a B scale also."
No B scale at the moment.
3 Payscales:
1/Frozen ATPL
2/ATPL
3/500 hrs on type
Pretty much all F/O's on the top pay scale now.
as far as the EBA voting so far which finishes on the 10th Jan. On the VB Pilots website so far'
Of the 560 odd pilots....250 have voted officially then in an unofficial vote on the site. So far its running at 97% NO
At some point a stand needs to be made in OZ and cease this race to the bottom in pay and conditions......With no pressure to the companies they will continue to drive the price down, while management take bonus after bonus while we all work our rings off!
The VB boys and girls are fed up with this lack of "Corporate Accountability/responsibility"...Sick of lies and empty promises.
We are making a stand and it is time for the QF and especially Jet Star to do the same.
As far as the Embraer pay scales.....Poor poor poor
As soon as OZJET found out what the captains pay for an Embraer skipper was at VB they upped it to match to stop crew running over.
Now why cant we all get tuff and work on that principle accross the board??:ugh:

[Jetsbest]

I like the way you think and maybe some sense is sinking in out there if what you say is true...

But wasn't it just a few years ago that Virgn pilots undercut Ansett & QF 737rates and many paid for endorsements to 'get the gig'. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you have to concede the irony now that you're saying "We are making a stand and it is time for the QF and especially Jet Star to do the same." :hmm:

QF's cost-lowering convergence mantra has, until recently, been linked exclusively to Virgin's conditions. I'm glad you're of the opinion that you're now, finally, worth more!:D

Good luck team.

[Defenestrator]

Operating cost includes cost of flight crew - lower pay = lower flight crew costs.

I'm not arguing with that. But as yet I've seen nothing to suggest that the Embraer has less earning potential than the 737. Both aircraft are modern, state-of-the-art jet airliners and will be operated in equally similar evironments. The crews will be trained to the same standard and expected to operate to a high standard. To differentiate between the two is nothing more than the companies desire to lower salaries. From a beancounters point of view a worthy proposition. From a pilots point of view it's the same **** in a different bucket.
Had they bought the 737 600 which seats the same as the 190 there would be no issue on pay as its the same AC.
Could not agree with you more Sleuth and although we can't be sure of that it rules out the 'MTOW denotes salary' argument. And as such why then a different pay scale? I assimilate it to paying a B58 pilot a different wage to a C-310 pilot even though they are doing the exact same job.

If VB management are selling this reduced salary garbage because the Embraer doesn't have the same earning capacity as the 737 then they are most certainly having a serious lend of the VB pilot body.

Glad to hear that the B scale on the 737 is not an issue.

My thoughts would only be swayed if it came to light that the Embraer cost the same to operate as the 73 in which case the lower salaries to some extent could be justified. And we all know that's not the case.

[busdriver007]

A quick look overseas and you will find the general direction of pilot's salaries is up. In the states in 2003-4 the pilots payrise topped the list with 15.6% on average increase. Combined with endorsement cost being incorporated in a bond type arrangement ala VB and you may find the same trend here. If AFAP and AIPA got together on strategy as I suspect QF and VB management do that may help.:)

[Mudgie]

There was an original agreement by CEO or should I say an "Gentlemans Agreement" that after the first year of operation the start up crews pay was to be raised to a figure much closer to their QF counter parts.
That was not honoured.
The Last Chief Pilot put in writing (which is up on the wall in Flight Planning room) that after the finish of the last Eba The pay would be increased to$....., but alas he left and nothing was done. Or should I say the AFAP dropped the ball also.
Yes it is ironic (paid for endorsement) that we are trying to make this stand!
I inherited this mess.
Having come from regional this is my first "Jet Job", but how do you say to a guy....stay in your Metro on secretary wages, dont take the job and make a stand!? Its up to the guys/girls in the jets to pave the way for those still aspiring to fly for an Airline.
What were trying to do is not allow the company to start a B scale for the Emb crews and bully us into a corner the entire EBA the Coy is trying to sell us is not only unsafe but not worth the cash.
Did you know .........A few days before Christmas during a "Roadshow" meeting where the Coy was trying to plug this EBA again, a Captain who spoke his mind, which we were asked to do mind you (ie Safety standards being compromised with new rules and that the current management were woefull) was taken off line flying by the henchmen for a week due to "Diplaying Emotional Fatigue".......!:=
After a meeting with AFAP, CP etc nearly a week later he was put back on line.....well they might as well take us all offline because we are all fed up!
This is just the start and the boys are digging in their heels. ;)

[Wingspar]

I hope this united approach keeps up. Over the last few years pilots have not been responsible for T & C's but maybe that will start to change. I'm sure with international and EMB ops about to start, management now have factored in a sense of urgency which can only be advantageous to the pilots in these negotiations. The same could be said if JQ want to expand at the intended rate that QF want. Maybe we will see market forces come around and actually be a godsend.

All the best.

[Visual Landing]

Mudgie
I think you need to get all the facts regarding that 'captain' with regard to what was said and not said. And this is not the forum for it.

[oldhasbeen]

I have to disagree. Any constructive advice on how to get around the ****e rostering system at VB and get a few days off over Chrissy without it affecting annual leave has to be aired .This way, at next years december forum there will be hundreds of guys speaking their mind and a ton of happy wives and kiddies around the christmas tree come the 25th.
Just wish I had thought of it when I worked there!!:D :D

[Mudgie]

What forum would you prefer??

Maybe under the carpet where it should't be!?

And as far as my facts right about the Captain concerned.

Poor morale
Flight Ops under resourced
Training issues
Lack of support on line

These are just some of the issues raised......

We need to communicate with all pilots accross the companies and not play this "you and us game" between the Airlines. It has and will affect us all and we need look out for each other....thats all:mad:

[Visual Landing]

I take it you were there then Mudgie? Because thats not what I heard him say at the meeting. And no one is playing a 'us and them' game but I would have thought that vb issues are just that. PS I dont want to sweep anything 'under the carpet' as you say but maybe we should look after our own problems 'in house' before telling the world. Oh I forgot, ;), it is a rumour network.:) Oh and while I am on, I agree that we need a single pilot union in australia.:ok:

[distracted cockroach]

Getting back to the original question, I understand rates of pay for different aircraft types were traditionally based on aircraft max weight...hence pay normally increasing with aircraft size.
What are the comparitive max weights for the JJ and the 737?

Agree banded pay scales could be argued to be the way of the future. Personally I think they are a good idea. Does away with a lot of the "fleet jumping" for money, and associated training costs for airlines.....but then pilots would still want to fleet jump coz we all want to fly the latest and greatest equipment...until we realise it is just another aircraft, and what really matters is quality of life...takes some longer to learn this than others:ok:

[ITCZ]

Oh and while I am on, I agree that we need a single pilot union in australia.:ok:

I'd love to see that. But you'll have to wait for some dinosaurs to die out. The 'new' AIPA is having a turf war with the AFAP, and that will end up in court.

Anyone ever heard of 'win-win'? Obviously not. Lets fight for a bigger slice of a diminishing pie - unionised pilots. F'ing good one, guys. :D

[Chris Higgins]

And now..back on thread.
The Embraer Jets are a great idea for VB, because a lower cost "route-development" aircraft is always a good idea for a carrier that's trying to increase market share.
If the route grows, it can be taken over by a 737, if it grows slowly, then peak hour loads can be flown by 737s and the Embraer used elsewhere. The big advantage is to be able to increase frequency between city pairs that don't have high non-peak time loads.
When Ozjet got started I was concerned about the viability due to schedule frequency, reliability, and availability of destinations throughout their network.
Virgin Blue will really be a major player now as it takes up routes that would have been considered unlikely with a Boeing. Within the Australian psyche, it will appeal to rural types who now don't feel left behind as well as business travelers who no longer feel restricted to only fly between major city centres.
The product will be new, relatively quiet, clean and have the safety advancements of the latest technology.
I hope that you guys can work out a living wage and that you don't get talked back into another pay-for-training contract.

[Zapper]

Relating the remuneration for a task to the potential loss should one make a mess of it?

Just how much is it worth to any company to keep the aeroplanes airborne and out of the dirt? Think hull loss and replacement cost, the demise of the airline, the loss of many jobs, compensation for hundreds of lives lost etc

This would of course relate remuneration to potential loss if a mistake is made.

A good question for any CEO/Beancounter:
"What do you think your pilots are worth when you are sitting down the back and #$%^ happens?"

[Chris Higgins]

Zapper,
Sadly there have been attempts to recreate analysis with pay level and safety for some time and none of those arguments hold water. USAir was the highest paid pilot group at a time when they experienced five crashes in five years. It has much more to do with screening at interview, training standards, company safety culture and experience on type.
We did very well on our last contract and I'm proud of the new found profitability of our company for working together to achieve what hopes to be a great future, but statistically we are just as safe an operation as before.
The problem with pay for training operators is that there is the temptation on the part of the recruiter to overlook fundamental flaws in the history of an applicant just to fill a slot. In the true spirit of competition only those with the highest experience levels, the highest levels of education and the best history of operating an aircraft should be allowed the chance.
Pay for training does have a statistical correlation as was shown at Pinnacle Airlines, Northwest Airlink and Atlantic Coast Airlines all who attracted low time pilots who left much to be desired in post accident analysis.

[Contract Con]

Gday Chris,

Its the old adage,

You pay peanuts......

Cheers,

Con:ok:

[Chris Higgins]

Contract Con,
We know that there are significant costs involved in introducing a new aircraft type and something to consider might be a "snap-back" clause, where you agree with a slightly reduced overhead for a particular calendar period then it snaps back to a higher agreed upon salary. I'm not in favour of poor industrial relations or a protracted dispute being carried out in the media. A collective bargaining agreement of sorts..where people actually agree about affordability and costs, together with projected revenues, should work for everyone.

[Gnadenburg]

and something to consider might be a "snap-back" clause, where you agree with a slightly reduced overhead for a particular calendar period then it snaps back to a higher agreed upon salary.


Been done before hasn't it Chris?

89ers and friends, lured back to Australia to establish Virgin Blue, were promised significantly improved conditions of service once things up and running.

Not everyone got the tens of millions of some!

No greater treachery, than Australians in aviation. :\