the new agreement

[Rotten Apple #1]

If someone asked me, I'd be willing to work under the existing terms of our agreement for another year.

Although that could be a knee jerk reaction to the continuous flood of negative financial headlines.

[neophyte]

So there is nothing you feel that could be changed? There is nothing that management could offer (that wouldn't affect our bottom line) that you would like the pilot group to negotiate?

Our agreement is good, real good, but even good things can get better.

Neo

[Rotten Apple #1]

The post had nothing to do with what I want going forward.

The conventional wisdom is that LCC's fare better than the rest in declining economic environments. Unfortunately what has developed, and will develop is unfamiliar territory.

Perhaps we could wait a year to see what the fall out is economically.

That's all.

[daveg]

Im with you on that as well Jonny.

[Biff]

Perhaps as a measure of goodwill, the executives could also revert back to their old wage scale, of two years ago.

[CanadaEH]

Perhaps as a measure of goodwill, the executives could also revert back to their old wage scale, of two years ago.

What was that? And what would 'reverting' back to it do for you or the Company?

I'm perfectly fine with the way our executives are compensated.

[neophyte]

Sorry Johnny, I am not following you. (It is known that I am a little slow) If you are not looking forward then why would you want to wait a year for different economic times.

For what it's worth, I could stick with the current agreement for a while as well.

What was the old agreement like? Am I correct in understanding that the cash was higher while the options were less?

Please forgive me, I am new.

Neo

[Rotten Apple #1]

Neo, sorry about the thinness of my post. I was rushed.

The last agreement had more "options" (the financial instrument kind, and lot's less cash.

Going into potentially decreasing revenues/profits, is not exactly the best time to negotiate. However if our wjpa guys figger it can be donen have at er.

[WJ700]

I'm not out so much for myself on this but I want to see our FO's in year 1 and 2 brought above the poverty line as a number 1 priority. As for the rest... well, fix the benefits and I'll be content for a while.

[KAG]

If we do anything that is going to have any impact over the next year or more, I hope it includes a 0% stock option - even though I'd jump all over a $10 strike price!!!

[Herc_Driver]

...... but I want to see our FO's in year 1 and 2 brought above the poverty line as a number 1 priority. ....

Many thanks - that would be nice. It would be a real pleasure to see WestJet become a trend setter and lead the way by moving away from this trend of the "two year penalty pay".

Here's hoping, and wishing.

Cheers

[lien]

WJ700
I also think that year 1 and 2 are not great pay scales, but I would rather worry about a 6 or 7 year FO coming over at year 1 pay scale for Capt. I believe that F/0's should carry over at least half years of service to Captain wage (year 6 F/O comes over at year 3 Capt.) . When guys were going Capt. after 12 to 18 months it wasn't a big deal but now new F/O could wait a long while(5,6,7 years?) to go Captain!! I think this is a lot more important!

Just my two cents!

[CanadaEH]

WJ700
I also think that year 1 and 2 are not great pay scales, but I would rather worry about a 6 or 7 year FO coming over at year 1 pay scale for Capt. I believe that F/0's should carry over at least half years of service to Captain wage (year 6 F/O comes over at year 3 Capt.) . When guys were going Capt. after 12 to 18 months it wasn't a big deal but now new F/O could wait a long while(5,6,7 years?) to go Captain!! I think this is a lot more important!

And that would apply to every other employee too, right?

[Four1oh]

WJ700
I also think that year 1 and 2 are not great pay scales, but I would rather worry about a 6 or 7 year FO coming over at year 1 pay scale for Capt. I believe that F/0's should carry over at least half years of service to Captain wage (year 6 F/O comes over at year 3 Capt.) . When guys were going Capt. after 12 to 18 months it wasn't a big deal but now new F/O could wait a long while(5,6,7 years?) to go Captain!! I think this is a lot more important!

And that would apply to every other employee too, right?

explain.

[Clint23]

It already does, only better. A 5 year CSA that goes in flight starts at a 5 yr FA scale on day one and vice a verse a. The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

WJ700
I also think that year 1 and 2 are not great pay scales, but I would rather worry about a 6 or 7 year FO coming over at year 1 pay scale for Capt. I believe that F/0's should carry over at least half years of service to Captain wage (year 6 F/O comes over at year 3 Capt.) . When guys were going Capt. after 12 to 18 months it wasn't a big deal but now new F/O could wait a long while(5,6,7 years?) to go Captain!! I think this is a lot more important!

And that would apply to every other employee too, right?

[CanadaEH]

It already does, only better. A 5 year CSA that goes in flight starts at a 5 yr FA scale on day one and vice a verse a. The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

Right, because they are classified as "frontline" (FA/CSA/AS/TAC) and the company allows them to move between jobs and stay at the appropriate step as determined by years. The transferrable skills have been determined to be similar enough to warrant the same scale, I'm going to assume. I'm not going to suggest that a FO and Captain have different skills because at the end of the day they're there to fly an aircraft, right? The difference is, correct me if I'm wrong, the level of responsibility of one over the other? If you were in the Airports dept, and you were a CSA.. the next level of responsibility would be a Shift Lead which comes with a higher pay scale. What is being suggested (if applied to other parts of the Company) is that years served as a Shift Lead would go towards determining pay if that CSA became a Shift Lead. Aside from some exceptions during the reorg. that went on this year, that just won't happen in the Airports world. I'm not going to disagree or agree with that philosophy, but that's the reality of today.

What would the arguement be for years served as an FO being used towards a Captain's salary? I'd like to hear that side of the arguement.

EDITED: Sorry, at what step does a FO's salary surpass a Captain's?

[BLZD1]

At AC a 12th year First Officer upgrades to a Capt. and gets 12th year Capt. pay on type. Years of service is years of service no BS!

[Clint23]

Canada, it is industry standard for YOS (Years of Service) for FO's to get 1 for 1 to the skippers pay. Now I am not saying that we should get 1 for 1, perhaps 1 for 2, but we have been told that we get X% of industry standard, and so since this is industry standard, it only seems proper to include that as well.

IMHO

Cheers

It already does, only better. A 5 year CSA that goes in flight starts at a 5 yr FA scale on day one and vice a verse a. The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

Right, because they are classified as "frontline" (FA/CSA/AS/TAC) and the company allows them to move between jobs and stay at the appropriate step as determined by years. The transferrable skills have been determined to be similar enough to warrant the same scale, I'm going to assume. I'm not going to suggest that a FO and Captain have different skills because at the end of the day they're there to fly an aircraft, right? The difference is, correct me if I'm wrong, the level of responsibility of one over the other? If you were in the Airports dept, and you were a CSA.. the next level of responsibility would be a Shift Lead which comes with a higher pay scale. What is being suggested (if applied to other parts of the Company) is that years served as a Shift Lead would go towards determining pay if that CSA became a Shift Lead. Aside from some exceptions during the reorg. that went on this year, that just won't happen in the Airports world. I'm not going to disagree or agree with that philosophy, but that's the reality of today.

What would the arguement be for years served as an FO being used towards a Captain's salary? I'd like to hear that side of the arguement.

EDITED: Sorry, at what step does a FO's salary surpass a Captain's?

[CanadaEH]

I didn't know it was industry standard, so that helps clear up a bit of it.

[CanadaEH]

The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

I quickly checked the pay scales for pilots.. I didn't know FO pay froze at the same rate from years 4-9. Why is that? Something to do with the mix of options?

[Clint23]

Nothing to do with that whatsoever, it was just that no one had taken that long to upgrade. Now it will be a few more years (6-8) to go left seat, so I believe there will be a new pay scale with the next agreement to show a true 9 yr pay scale for the FO's.

Cheers

The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

I quickly checked the pay scales for pilots.. I didn't know FO pay froze at the same rate from years 4-9. Why is that? Something to do with the mix of options?

[Smitty]

Nothing to do with that whatsoever, it was just that no one had taken that long to upgrade. Now it will be a few more years (6-8) to go left seat, so I believe there will be a new pay scale with the next agreement to show a true 9 yr pay scale for the FO's.

Cheers

A nine year payscale would be a good addition to the contract as long as a nine year FO doesn't have to take a pay cut to go left seat.

[WJ700]

Just curious why you'd think 1 for 2 and not 1 for 1?? Why would we not just have the 'normal' YOS scale?? Do you really think that would have a difference on the bottom line? I think you have my home email if you don't want to post the answer here.

Canada, it is industry standard for YOS (Years of Service) for FO's to get 1 for 1 to the skippers pay. Now I am not saying that we should get 1 for 1, perhaps 1 for 2, but we have been told that we get X% of industry standard, and so since this is industry standard, it only seems proper to include that as well.

IMHO

Cheers

It already does, only better. A 5 year CSA that goes in flight starts at a 5 yr FA scale on day one and vice a verse a. The pilots, to my knowledge are the only ones that start at the bottom of the scale.

Right, because they are classified as "frontline" (FA/CSA/AS/TAC) and the company allows them to move between jobs and stay at the appropriate step as determined by years. The transferrable skills have been determined to be similar enough to warrant the same scale, I'm going to assume. I'm not going to suggest that a FO and Captain have different skills because at the end of the day they're there to fly an aircraft, right? The difference is, correct me if I'm wrong, the level of responsibility of one over the other? If you were in the Airports dept, and you were a CSA.. the next level of responsibility would be a Shift Lead which comes with a higher pay scale. What is being suggested (if applied to other parts of the Company) is that years served as a Shift Lead would go towards determining pay if that CSA became a Shift Lead. Aside from some exceptions during the reorg. that went on this year, that just won't happen in the Airports world. I'm not going to disagree or agree with that philosophy, but that's the reality of today.

What would the arguement be for years served as an FO being used towards a Captain's salary? I'd like to hear that side of the arguement.

EDITED: Sorry, at what step does a FO's salary surpass a Captain's?

[CanadaEH]

I was curious to know why the suggestion was made that 1:1 should be equal in steps. I had no idea idea it was the industry standard, so that's a pretty easy answer. I'm not even going to guess what effect that would have on the bottom line but with salary being our #2 cost, I'd imagine that would be a contentious issue.

If, for example, you're a Captain and are on step #2 and a FO with 5 YOS gets upgraded to the 5yr Captain scale.. how would you feel about that? How would other pilots feel about that? In the Airports world that wouldn't happen. If you get a higher paying job and the starting pay of that new job is less than what you are currently making, you get paid the higher of the two. I don't see why that wouldn't apply to pilots as well.

One question: if you were jumping to a completely different role would you want YOS to be a determining factor in pay (i.e. FA to Maintenance or SSA to People Dept)? Or would YOS only be applied to a similar role (i.e. CSA and Shift Lead @ Airports, TAC and TAC Shift Lead/Crew Chief @ TAC)?

[Tim Tam]

Opinion time:

We NEED to allow us (the FO's ) to slide over with years of service. Why? Because after 6 years at least (for some), it needs to be an incentive to take on the extra responsibility. Once the new scales for FO's get sorted out, why would a 6,7,or 8 year FO want to come over to the left seat for not much more money?

Remember folks, the more you make the more tax they take!

Look at Air Canada - they have senior RP's flying the B777 for similar money than the new Capts. on the Embraer!! Why would they want to take on the left seat role on a smaller jet, flying worse routes, working more days etc... I know we are not AC, but as we grow, and *if* we get bigger Aircraft, then these sorts of things will come up in negotiations.

This was not a problem when we growing leaps and bounds and it only took 2 years to see the left seat. Now, a little different.