NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesting..

Malko

ughhh
Staff member
[ QUOTE ]

Liz Fedor, Star Tribune
July 28, 2004 NWA0728
Pilot leaders at Northwest Airlines say they are willing to negotiate a lower pay scale that would allow the carrier to add 70-seat jets to its fleet.

The pilots union said its proposal would preserve jobs while at the same time help Northwest to capitalize on one of the fastest-growing segments in the airline industry.

Northwest declined to comment on the pilot proposal Tuesday. The Eagan-based airline does not have any 70-seat jets in its fleet. Its smaller jets have fewer than 70 seats and are flown by lower-paid pilots at its regional affiliates, Mesaba Airlines and Pinnacle Airlines. Northwest wants regional pilots to also be able to fly 70-seat jets, which the current Northwest contract prohibits, the union said.

Instead of allowing Northwest to assign the flying to Mesaba or Pinnacle or another regional airline, pilot leaders are offering to negotiate labor costs that are competitive with other 70-seat operators.

"What they want is 70-seaters," Curt Kruse, a pilot and spokesman for the Northwest branch of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), said Tuesday.

ALPA negotiators argue that it is in the best interests of the airline and the union to establish pay rates, benefits and work rules that allow Northwest to compete for 70-seat business.

"We believe the 70-seater is the right size aircraft to fill the gap between the Northwest narrow-body aircraft and the small jets currently flown by Northwest's feeders," Kruse said.

Under the current contract, all Northwest flying in airplanes containing 55 seats or more must be performed by Northwest pilots, except for three dozen 69-seat Avros flown by Eagan-based Mesaba.

Pinnacle, based in Memphis, is flying 44- and 50-seat Canadair Regional Jets (CRJs), but the number of 50-seaters is restricted based on a ratio with the narrow-bodied planes in Northwest's mainline fleet.

In April, Pinnacle CEO Philip Trenary said he'd like to see his airline fly larger airplanes. But he acknowledged that Northwest management probably wants to conclude its pilot negotiations before making decisions about acquiring more small jets.

Northwest has been reducing its workforce since early 2001 and 787 Northwest pilots remain on furloughs. They would have the first rights to obtain the 70-seat flying, according to the proposal that ALPA gave management July 1.

The union is awaiting a counter-proposal from management.

Northwest gave the pilots union a concessionary proposal in February 2003 that would have reduced pilot costs by more than $400 million a year. Management also asked ALPA to allow Northwest to acquire up to 72 small jets seating between 51 and 70 passengers. Executives wanted to remove all restrictions on small jets with 50 or fewer seats. And they wanted to expand seating on Mesaba's Avros from 69 to 85 seats.

A few months ago, Northwest ALPA offered to reduce pilot compensation by $200 million a year. The company has countered with a $300 million proposal.

Both sides hope to reach an agreement by the fall, because the airline has been losing money on its operations for the past three years. Northwest management is seeking to reduce all labor costs by $950 million a year, but the pilots' union is the only work group that has been willing to discuss cutbacks.

The 70-seater jet is a critical topic in the pilot negotiations, because it is a key aspect of defining the scope of flying for Northwest pilots.

There is a strong element of pragmatism in the pilots' approach because they are balancing Northwest's business interests with pilots' job protection interests, Kruse said.

That element was evident in a memo that pilot negotiators sent their members. "Pilot hourly pay rates at airlines currently operating 70-seat jets are significantly lower than pay rates under the NWA pilot contract," Northwest ALPA said in a mailing to pilots. "The difference in total pilot costs is even more pronounced due to differences in work rules, benefits and retirement."

Northwest ALPA included a comparison chart in its mailing that showed the estimated pilot cost per block hour for flying a 70-seat jet. It was $274.85 for Mesaba Airlines, $304.71 for Comair and $249.59 for American Eagle. There isn't a 70-seat rate in Northwest's current pilot contract, but the block hour cost would be $705.47 if the DC-9 rate were used.

That current contract says Northwest pilots have the right to fly jets of over 55 seats, with the one exception being the Mesaba Avros. "We want to translate that language into jobs," Kruse said, but the jobs won't materialize under the existing pay rates, work rules and benefits.

Northwest ALPA's proposal is reminiscent of talks that have been held at American Airlines, said Robert Mann, an airline industry analyst from New York. But American Eagle, the regional carrier, is flying the 70-seaters.

"Unless you bring along flight attendants, mechanics and ground personnel to similar regional pay rates, then you can't equalize the costs," Mann said. American was unable to achieve that goal, and he added that it will be a major challenge for Northwest management.

Liz Fedor is at

lfedor@startribune.com.



[/ QUOTE ]
 
The dichotomy is that either airlines are going to stand their ground firmly and be slowly forced out of business (over the next 10-15 years) to be replaced by smaller, short-lived low cost carriers, or these same airlines can make whatever adjustments as needed if they wish to stay in the game.

It's a sad, sad thing. We'd all love to see the carriers that we grew up with stay profitable. That's not going to be the case forever, though.

How else can a legacy airline stay profitable AND competitive?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Is this part of the race to the bottom?

[/ QUOTE ]

Could that be rephrashed as "The race to stay alive..."?

It sucks either way.
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

I don't think so in this case, Mike.

The mainline pilots are trying to get "jurisdiction" over these aircraft before they get relegated to outside companies (i.e. regional affiliates). Yes the pay will be lower but that's within the scope of the RTLA which lays the ground work for pilot pay (based on aircraft weight).

I think this is a good thing, assuming the NWA pilots don't slit their own throats just to get access to these aircraft.

Who knows, though.
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think so in this case, Mike.

The mainline pilots are trying to get "jurisdiction" over these aircraft before they get relegated to outside companies (i.e. regional affiliates). Yes the pay will be lower but that's within the scope of the RTLA which lays the ground work for pilot pay (based on aircraft weight).

I think this is a good thing, assuming the NWA pilots don't slit their own throats just to get access to these aircraft.

Who knows, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess time will show. Hope there's method to the madness, so to speak.
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

And this, my friends, is where ALPA is gonna get in trouble. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't ALPA represent both mainline NWA and Mesaba/Pinnacle? How are they gonna be able to re-negotiate this without screwing one or the other? And here's another thing, are the mins for the RJs at mainline gonna be the same as normal hiring mins? Could make it VERY difficult for new pilots to break into the 121 market if the majors start taking over the regional jobs.
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

If the mins go up people instruct longer or fly longer at 135 jobs. Lower mins at regionals is one of the things that help keep the pay in the sub-20,000s. Higher mins mean fewer folks able to take the job which (should) equal higher pay. We can't have it both ways (i.e. 500 hour pilots making 300,000/yr).
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

There is a positive side. At least the RJ pilots will have NWA seniority #'s.
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

I think this actually has some potential to be good here. Depending on what the pilots can get paid for the 70 jets this could work out really well, actually. I don't think any of us have any problems with flying 50 seat jets around, it's what that job pays that really pisses us off. The aircraft size to pay scale at regionals and majors are VASTLY disconnected and that's a problem. If NWA could formulate an extention of their current pay scale that puts the 70 seat RJ's fall in line with what a 737 crew makes, then we'll be in business and this could actually help to stem the tide of the RJ inception. Honestly, I could be real happy flying a 50 or 70 seat jet around IF and ONLY IF it paid in line with major airline pay scales. As John also notes, this will provide these guys with NWA senority numbers.

So depending on what the union does, this could be the very thing that SAVES this profession from the downward spiral it's in right now. On the surface it might look bad, but I think if you look a little deeper then the pilots union is making a lot of sense trying to get these accomplished before Mesaba and Pinnacle scream "BUT WE'LL DO IT FOR $2.50 AN HOUR!" If the NWA pilots union can get NWA to fit the 70 seat RJ in line with their pay scales things could work out really well.

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

I agree with both John and Pilot602.

So, tell me this? What if legacy carriers started flying their own RJs, but they still paid the RJ pilots less than, say, a 737 crew. You get a seniority number, but you don't get paid as much on that particular equipment.

Would you support that?

I think that would make it work perfectly...
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

Well, then yes. If it's a step towards flying the big iron some day, that would make sense. Basically a launching ground to the majors - kind of like minor league ball. You do the same job, but for a smaller "crowd"(pax) and in a smaller "stadium"(aircraft) - all the while grooming yourself for a shot at the "Bigs" (major airline).
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

It's more than just the number. I look at it this way:

If you take a major airlines pay scale, there is a straight line running (roughly) from the smallest equipment to the largest one. The scale is linear and does not have a lot of deviation in it. Now if you were to continue to extend this scale down to where a 70 seat RJ would be, you would be WAY above the pay scale for regionals.

The reason is that because regionals are operated under a different company, that company can pay whatever it wants. If you can get those RJ's under the same pay rules as the mainline equipment the pay will go up, the work rules will get better and you'll get a number. It'll finally make the RJ pay what it SHOULD because the airline will be FORCED to use it's current pay scale.

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 
Re: NWA pilots offer to fly small jets - Interesti

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with both John and Pilot602.

So, tell me this? What if legacy carriers started flying their own RJs, but they still paid the RJ pilots less than, say, a 737 crew. You get a seniority number, but you don't get paid as much on that particular equipment.

Would you support that?

I think that would make it work perfectly...

[/ QUOTE ]

That's perfectly fine. Because pay is tied to aircraft weight and the ratio forumlas for the smaller jets would probably end up with a higher pay than the same pilot flying the same aircraft at a regional (maybe not a lot higher but my guess is it would be at least livable).

737 crews make less than 747 crews so it only makes sense that an rj crew would make less than a 737 crew.

Again, I think is the NWA pilots don't "give away the farm" just to get 70 seaters "on campus" (as our fearless leader is fond of saying) then I think it could be good in getting smaller jets into mainline operations and under mainline contracts. If these guys give too much then it'd probably be better to leave the rjs under the regionals as too much concession by the mainline guys for RJs will set a precedent that might "trickle" up the aircraft types.

This one could go either way ... all depends on how it's played out.
 
It's not so much part of the race to the bottom as trying to stuff the RJ genie back in the bottle. ALPA screwed the pooch big time when they agreed to allow jets to be flown by non-mainline pilots, and now that things aren't going so well at the mainline carriers but booming at the regionals, they now see the error of their ways and are trying to rectify the situation--which is great, but it won't work if only one pilot group is doing it, and for substandard regional rates. Pilot groups at the other legacy carriers still don't see it and would rather thumb their noses at the regional pilots than demand that they and their aircraft be brought up to mainline. Still too much of the "I got mine, good luck getting yours" attitude among mainline pilot groups, only the "I got mine" part is slipping out of their hands.
 
What do you all think about the, for lack of a better twrm, "pickle" that ALPA gets in when it represents the interests of both mainline and regional pilot groups? In the sense that it's nearly impossible to please both?

On a separate note, IMO, I don't think there should be a pay disparity between RJs operated by a mainline and the other aircraft operated by the same mainline; at least not a major disparity. I understand the minor differences in pay between different aircraft types, but I don't support regional or near-regional wages for RJ pilots that work for a mainline (with the jets being flown by the mainline). Personally, I don't even think that there should be disparity in pay simply due to different airframes. In my world, a T-37 pilot gets paid the same as a C-5 pilot, pay difference is based on "seniority", so to speak, due to rank and time-in-service. But a rated-Major with 12 years of service gets paid what all other rated-Major's with 12 years of service get; any bonus pay notwithstanding. Just my opinion.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What do you all think about the, for lack of a better twrm, "pickle" that ALPA gets in when it represents the interests of both mainline and regional pilot groups? In the sense that it's nearly impossible to please both?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called a conflict of interest and is the foundation of the RJDC's lawsuit against ALPA.

http://www.rjdefense.com/
 
Back
Top