Virgin America Pilot Pay Increase

BobDDuck said:
The PSA deal wasn't concessionary, despite what the rabble rousers (rowsers?) would have you believe. The increase in insurance premiums, while certainly a decrease in benefits, hardly qualify as concessionary in the current environment.
Click to expand...
Couple questions, Bob,

Why would management come banging down the door to ask pilots for a contract with no concessions?

What are the new pay scales compared to the old and how is that not a concession?

Lastly, why do I hear the same rhetoric and lines like "PSA deal wasn't concessionary" and "no one at PSA took a pay cut" from PSA pilots as I do from guys like you, ATN pilot, and my own company alpa reps like you guys are on some kind of propaganda campaign?
 
A contract can give management some money without it being concessionary. For example, you could give up $2/hr in exchange for better reserve work rules. While the pay scale goes down, you decided that you valued work rules more than pay. That's not a concession, it's a trade.

In the case of the PSA contract (and again, I'm not saying that I would have voted for it), a trade was made of dollars for career progression. You can argue in favor of one way or the other, but you can't call a trade a concession, unless the things being traded can be measured in pure dollar value. And since things like career progression and QOL are highly subjective, they can't be measured in terms of dollar value.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
A contract can give management some money without it being concessionary. For example, you could give up $2/hr in exchange for better reserve work rules. While the pay scale goes down, you decided that you valued work rules more than pay. That's not a concession, it's a trade.

In the case of the PSA contract (and again, I'm not saying that I would have voted for it), a trade was made of dollars for career progression. You can argue in favor of one way or the other, but you can't call a trade a concession, unless the things being traded can be measured in pure dollar value. And since things like career progression and QOL are highly subjective, they can't be measured in terms of dollar value.
Click to expand...
Is that the logic being manufactured at ALPA? Quite the exercise in semantics. They took concessions in order to get more jets, right? They had to take concessions first to make the deal happen. Now its not concessionary? Its a slippery slope, would flying for free in exchange for an interview at mainline be concessionary?

To hear my own union reps say that it wasn't a concession is what gets me. We can't all take concessions, err, whatever you call it to trade for upgrades and interviews because then we're back to the race to the bottom.
 
cstewart6 said:
Is that the logic being manufactured at ALPA?
Click to expand...

ALPA International doesn't make any decisions in regards to bargaining. Those decisions are made by your own representatives. ALPA just provides them the resources that they need to accomplish whatever their goals are.

Quite the exercise in semantics. They took concessions in order to get more jets, right? They had to take concessions first to make the deal happen. Now its not concessionary? Its a slippery slope, would flying for free in exchange for an interview at mainline be concessionary?
Click to expand...

It's not semantics. Trading in bargaining is just the normal course of business. Rarely do you just get something that you want. You typically need to trade something, if for no other reason than the other party has an emotional need to "save face" and claim to whoever they report that they got something in return. It is up to those bargaining (and voting) to decide whether the trade is a net gain, or a net loss. Your perception is that it was a net loss. Apparently your negotiators, MEC, and fellow pilots disagreed with you.

Furthermore, it wasn't just for more jets. It was also for a path to mainline. Maybe you don't value that, but a very large section of the RJ community does.

To hear my own union reps say that it wasn't a concession is what gets me. We can't all take concessions, err, whatever you call it to trade for upgrades and interviews because then we're back to the race to the bottom.
Click to expand...

Again, that's a judgment that each voter has to make. If it was me having to place a vote, I'd probably feel as you do. But I'm just one vote, and so are you. What is of value to the majority is what prevails.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
A contract can give management some money without it being concessionary. For example, you could give up $2/hr in exchange for better reserve work rules. While the pay scale goes down, you decided that you valued work rules more than pay. That's not a concession, it's a trade.

In the case of the PSA contract (and again, I'm not saying that I would have voted for it), a trade was made of dollars for career progression. You can argue in favor of one way or the other, but you can't call a trade a concession, unless the things being traded can be measured in pure dollar value. And since things like career progression and QOL are highly subjective, they can't be measured in terms of dollar value.
Click to expand...

Are you serious?! It was concessionary jets-for-growth no matter which way you look at it. "Trade" is hardly the right word to use here. And regional flows to mainline? I guess 9E pilots also traded some pay for path to Delta, right? :rolleyes:
 
jtrain609 said:
Can somebody lock up this thread before I say something that's going to get me banned? Maybe move it to the mind numbing topics forum?
Click to expand...
Do it,man. Let go. You'll actually feel better. I was expecting a yellow card in the other thread. I'm debating on if I would have even been upset over it.

Mike mentioned in one thread that this neighborhood has been going South. I've noticed that a lot of the guys that used to post here are just gone. Used to you could come here for an exchange of ideas, laughs and maybe meet a few drinking buddies. The wrath and brimstone was restricted to those that said PFT was the way of the future or Republicans/Democrats/Nader are right. Now? It's "my airline sucks less than yours," "You're bringing down the industry," and "if you don't agree with me, you're stupid and should go hide in a hole."

Kinda makes me sad since I remember how great this place used to be and how much of an impact it had on my life. Used to, if JC crashed for a day, we'd all get twitchy needing our fix. Now? Honestly, if Doug pulled the plug in the next hour, I'm not sure id shed a tear.
 
kellwolf said:
Do it,man. Let go. You'll actually feel better. I was expecting a yellow card in the other thread. I'm debating on if I would have even been upset over it.

Mike mentioned in one thread that this neighborhood has been going South. I've noticed that a lot of the guys that used to post here are just gone. Used to you could come here for an exchange of ideas, laughs and maybe meet a few drinking buddies. The wrath and brimstone was restricted to those that said PFT was the way of the future or Republicans/Democrats/Nader are right. Now? It's "my airline sucks less than yours," "You're bringing down the industry," and "if you don't agree with me, you're stupid and should go hide in a hole."

Kinda makes me sad since I remember how great this place used to be and how much of an impact it had on my life. Used to, if JC crashed for a day, we'd all get twitchy needing our fix. Now? Honestly, if Doug pulled the plug in the next hour, I'm not sure id shed a tear.
Click to expand...

Kell, am glad to see someone was getting the drift of what I was referring to, and even though I was trying to be somewhat funny about it, I was attempting to send a deeper message to the membership that this place.....this particular part of the forum.......will only be as good as the members who post here make it. Sadly, for a bunch of professionals, this place does go south way too easy and way too quick. One can say what they want about CC, but he hasn't been hurling personal spears at people. A professional should be able to debate/discuss facts and information, without any ad hominem usage.

I was once told "if you can't control what comes out of your mouth (or in this case, what you type), then you have no true control over anything else in your life."

We have numerous aviation members of different military services here, myself included, and we rag on one another fairly well around here over different things; but it never delves into anything personal; it's all good natured. Why is that not possible here with some professionals in this industry? Something to think about.....
 
Last edited:
Kell. Todd's a lame duck and Seggy just posts for effect. Lot's of people here know the score. Don't walk away from this site. It ain't perfect but you won't find a better place on the interwebs. If nothing else and you decide to walk I just want to say I've enjoyed your stuff over the years. Best of luck to you.
 
MikeD said:
A professional should be able to debate/discuss facts and information, without any ad hominem usage.

I was once told "if you can't control what comes out of your mouth (or in this case, what you type), then you have no true control over anything else in your life."
Click to expand...

Some people are in perfect control of what comes out of their mouth, but they disagree with your silly idea that you need to mask the truth in order to be "professional." A scumbag should be called a scumbag. A deadbeat should be called a deadbeat. And so on. There is no redeeming quality in sugarcoating things.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Some people are in perfect control of what comes out of their mouth, but they disagree with your silly idea that you need to mask the truth in order to be "professional." A scumbag should be called a scumbag. A deadbeat should be called a deadbeat. And so on. There is no redeeming quality in sugarcoating things.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of sugar coating anything. It's a matter of showing some modicum of decorum. Because one wouldn't expect there to be more decorum in the Lav than there is here. And that's pretty sad.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Some people are in perfect control of what comes out of their mouth, but they disagree with your silly idea that you need to mask the truth in order to be "professional." A scumbag should be called a scumbag. A deadbeat should be called a deadbeat. And so on. There is no redeeming quality in sugarcoating things.
Click to expand...
And this is why ALPA has a PR problem.
 
Off topic maybe but I always laugh a bit when the "this community has gone downhill" thing comes up, because usually its because someone isn't winning an argument.

Its a community and communities change. People come and go, some who went come back, and others don't. That's just how it is. If the community is no longer doing it for you, well...

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
kellwolf said:
And this is why ALPA has a PR problem.
Click to expand...

I don't think ALPA has a PR problem. I think they have a policy problem in that they don't ban everybody in a leadership role from posting their own personal opinions via social media and forums without writing a huge disclaimer that says THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION AND ALPA AS A WHOLE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME VIEW.

But then again, ALPA has had a communications problem for a while now and is only just starting to get out of the stone age of comm so I'm not really surprised. @surreal1221
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top