Alaska/Virgin arbitration

wheelsup said:
If anything it’s the Alaska guys that should be upset, they got jack with this merger, it was a stupid waste of money. Now here’s hoping jetBlue buys Spirit at $55/share so I can get my Panamera.
Click to expand...

I was rooting HARD for JetBlue to come through and buy VA.

Now I'm hoping we get purchased by someone else.
 
Don't rule out a AS/VX down the road merger with jetBlue. That could easily pass the DOJ antitrust, combine east with west, and still be the 5th largest airline in America. Our combined size would still be less than AA/DL/UA/SW.
 
learhawkerbe400 said:
I get that mentality but at what cost do you always vote yes? Scope? Work rules?

Sometimes making small gains may cost more in the long run.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I was clear if you think always “yes” is what I meant. I think there are guys who will always vote not because the contract isn’t perfect or doesn’t include their pet project or they like being tough guy complainers for the length of th contract. There are guys that will vote yes if it’s a $.01 increase.
Making gains with short term deals (not giving anything up like scope) and being able to take advantage of positive pattern bargaining with other carriers doing the same is the way to go.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Don't rule out a AS/VX down the road merger with jetBlue. That could easily pass the DOJ antitrust, combine east with west, and still be the 5th largest airline in America. Our combined size would still be less than AA/DL/UA/SW.
Click to expand...

JB couldn’t come close to affording Alaska now. If anything it would be Alaska buying JB, then we just screw over JB like we got screwed.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Keeps people employed? There's no one un-employed here. Our hiring is for growth mostly and little amounts of retirements. Here yoju are saying credit going down is a good thing so we have to hire more people? Gee, I guess that's one way to look at it (hello Management).
Click to expand...

Well it's an anti-management POV. More pilots on property to cover the same amount of flying. More reserves. More blockholders. More junior CAs. More CAs in general. It's a good thing for labor. It's spreading the wealth out. It's what unions are supposed to do. It might not seem like it now when times are good and everyone is hiring but you'll be thankful for the cushion when the down times hit.

Or, a reasonable person could say that we are now gonna get paid less hours for the same amount of days worked. It's a cut by definition. [ Most pilots (apparently I incorrectly assume) want the most amount of money, for the least amount of days worked. So if I fly 14 days and can get 90 hrs, that's great. Now if I work 14 days and only get 75-83 hrs, that's a cut. Any other explanation sounds like a "spread the wealth" type argument about getting newhires, expansion, etc.
Click to expand...

That is an issue with how Alaska builds their trips. Maybe VX just had looser work rules that allowed them to schedule pilots toward FAR maxes which maximized their daily work. That is the SWA mentality. That is a commuter mentality. Remember Alaska is a legacy and with that goes that legacy thinking. I do agree losing credit per pay kinda sucks but again that is an issue with the trips. I'm guessing at VX you mostly did JFK transcons 6 hours/day which is super efficent. We have trips like that here. But we also have crappier trips as well. Alaska has a different route network.

A day off on reserve is a huge deal. AS reserve rules suck, and I mean absolutely suck. I don't know what you price losing a reserve day, but to me 12 days on reserve lost back to the company is a huge deal. And I didn't get a $50/hr raise. I've run the math for my personal situation and it's nowhere close to 68,900 extra.
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't a big deal. You said:

Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Our reserves get 13 days off per month, AS gets 12. If I upgrade and go on reserve, that's 12 less days off per year. What cost do you put on that?
Click to expand...

So I did your math. Each day is worth an extra $5600.

VX CA pay year six (guessing) - $175
AK CA pay year six (guessing) - $225 (joint contract)

I'll do the math for you:
$225-$175 = $50/hr raise

Plus Alaska gives you an additional four (4) hours of pay per month for junior reserve. Plus another 3.5% 401k matching. See my above post for the hardcore math.

1,400 was quarterly bonus for meeting operational metrics. Profit share is extra on top of that. This year my profit share was 15,500.
Click to expand...

OK I see. Well, Alaska's margins are better than Virgin's so while the % is slightly less the payout will probably be the same if not more...I really don't want to run the numbers...so let's call this a wash.
 
AAPalmTree said:
If we continue to hire 900/yr it would take 3 years to recoup most of the 3,000.

I’m saying the airline couldn’t handle being that short. Besides having 3,000 less pilots in 3 years (if the furlough lasted that long) the airline would actually have 4,937 less pilots than now. Don’t think an airline could come back from that. They’d have to bring almost 5,000 pilots to the line instantly plus the 1,000/year they have to train to keep up with the retirements beyond year 3.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're doing the math correctly.

If you lose 2,000 guys but hire 3,000 the list doesn't expand by 5,000...
 
wheelsup said:
Well it's an anti-management POV. More pilots on property to cover the same amount of flying. More reserves. More blockholders. More junior CAs. More CAs in general. It's a good thing for labor. It's spreading the wealth out. It's what unions are supposed to do. It might not seem like it now when times are good and everyone is hiring but you'll be thankful for the cushion when the down times hit.



That is an issue with how Alaska builds their trips. Maybe VX just had looser work rules that allowed them to schedule pilots toward FAR maxes which maximized their daily work. That is the SWA mentality. That is a commuter mentality. Remember Alaska is a legacy and with that goes that legacy thinking. I do agree losing credit per pay kinda sucks but again that is an issue with the trips. I'm guessing at VX you mostly did JFK transcons 6 hours/day which is super efficent. We have trips like that here. But we also have crappier trips as well. Alaska has a different route network.



I never said it wasn't a big deal. You said:



So I did your math. Each day is worth an extra $5600.

VX CA pay year six (guessing) - $175
AK CA pay year six (guessing) - $225 (joint contract)

I'll do the math for you:
$225-$175 = $50/hr raise

Plus Alaska gives you an additional four (4) hours of pay per month for junior reserve. Plus another 3.5% 401k matching. See my above post for the hardcore math.



OK I see. Well, Alaska's margins are better than Virgin's so while the % is slightly less the payout will probably be the same if not more...I really don't want to run the numbers...so let's call this a wash.
Click to expand...

Yet again, you are looking at the hourly pay raise ONLY and not pricing out the loses in scheduling and trip builds. First, Alaska is a legacy but in name only. Their pilot group has historically paid lower than other legacies, and have routinely bent over and taken lower than acceptable contracts, especially when it comes to scope. Scope is something they threw under the bus time and time again. Second, Alaska is not a commuting airline. Somewhere like 80% of their pilots live in base. VX is the opposite where 80% commute. So, Alaska’s contract has provisions that are SPECIFICALLY for in-base pilots, and as such their lines are built for non-commuters.


Case in point: Lines must have a minimum of 4 separate cycles of 48 hrs off. This leads to many lines with days on, 2 off, days on, 2 off. They have MANY lines that require 5 commutes per month. They don’t care, because they know 80% drive to the airport.


In comparison, we both have many trips worth over 23:20. At VX, you tell PBS to give you a threshold of 70 hrs, and pairing credit greater than 23:20. That’s it. 23:20 times 3 is 70 hrs. So many guys get just three 4-day trips that pay 23:20+ and get 18-19 days off as a result. Just 3 commutes. This line construction is illegal at Alaska because, wait for it, it doesn’t have 4 separate cycles of 48 hrs off! Ridiculous. This is just one small example.


I find it particularly amusing that at Spirit, you’re saying pilots are complaining about a $50/hr raise for a 5th yr CA slot. I have the Spirit management final proposal of this year:

Current Spirit 5th yr CA pay = $136.35
Mgt proposed 5th yr CA pay = $202

That’s almost $66/hr raise or 48%!


Top 15th year CA rate current = $185.32
Mgt proposed Top CA rate = $235

That’s almost $50/hr raise or 27%!



Anyone can play that game. You say pilots will be pilots, and complain about a 30% raise or $50/hr at VX. But Spirit, 5th yr CA is a $66/hr increase or a 48% raise. Aren’t you the unreasonable one for turning that down?

You’ll probably counter, but it means PBS! That will be awful! You’ll say this mgt team will hose the entire pilot group with PBS and you won’t have control over trip quality and building trips, and you’ll lose your trip touch protection pay and vacation conflicts. You can say we’ll need less pilots, but with Spirit’s aggressive growth plans, you know that is not true and you’ll still grow your pilot group numbers.

Amazing how a 66/hr raise for you at a 48% percent raise is *unacceptable* because you’ll gain PBS and lose your line conflict advantages. Translation: I don’t like the high pay raise proposed (and YES, 66/hr = 48% raise is a high pay proposal), because it messes with our scheduling system, brings PBS, etc.

But for VX, you’re all about pay increase and nothing about the loss we take switching to their inefficient line system, which has no conflict/vacation/transition pay protection. You have to add back above 75 hrs. Before throwing the stone at VX pilots for “complaining” about this arbitration awards, a look in the mirror is warranted at Spirit. You of all groups should know a high pay raise is easily offset by a decent margin by losing your scheduling/line benefits. Without actually working here and knowing what we have, what we are losing, and what AS has, you can’t just map my payraise out and say I’m straight up making $50/hr more. I. Am. Not. :)
 
Last edited:
wheelsup said:
If you lose 2,000 guys but hire 3,000 the list doesn't expand by 5,000...
Click to expand...

Correct. If we furlough 20% that’s 3,000 guys not 2,000. We still retire 1,937 over three years. That leaves us 4,937 short of what we have today.

IF the airline planned on hiring 2,700 over the next three years (which is the current plan) they would be behind (in training events the difference between 1,937 and 2,700) 763 additional.
 
AAPalmTree said:
Correct. If we furlough 20% that’s 3,000 guys not 2,000. We still retire 1,937 over three years. That leaves us 4,937 short of what we have today.

IF the airline planned on hiring 2,700 over the next three years (which is the current plan) they would be behind (in training events the difference between 1,937 and 2,700) 763 additional.
Click to expand...
I really don’t think you’re doing the math right, still
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top