Status pay and other things about Jazz WACON

[teacher]

It was suggested that a seperate thread be started to discuss this instead of 7500ing other topics. So here it is, have at'r.

It was said in another thread that status pay at Jazz for the '57 is lowering the bar. How is spreading the extra money among the pilot group lowering the bar if in the end the company pays the same amount out in wages as if it were formula pay and pilots made different amounts as per aircraft type?

How is status pay lowering the bar but agreeing to and even encouraging competition among partners airlines (SR vs Jazz) so that one pilot group can make even less than they do now in the hope of securing extra money for themselves not lowering the bar?

I wonder how much this thread will drift.

[prop2jet]

7700ing? You mean 7500 right? Sorry to 7500 on the first response.

[KAG]

So what's happening over at Skyregional? I hear they pay on the low side, I wonder whats going on with their hiring?...

[teacher]

7700ing? You mean 7500 right? Sorry to 7500 on the first response.

HA! Posting after a long day of multiple weather and ATC delays = unable to type.

[TopperHarley]

I like the status pay system if the aircraft types are fairly similar. For a company that has a mix, Id prefer to see a 2 tier payscale. Ex), at AC, they could have a narrowbody (EMB + A320) and a widebody payscale (767, 777, 330, 787), instead of seperate scales for each a/c.

Although the status pay system at Jazz with the 757 benefited me while I was there, I would have been in favor of a 2 tier payscale (dash + RJ, 757). People are going to chase the 757 regardless eventually as the operations grow. Lots of pilots say they wont chase metal and will stay on the RJ or D8 because of the "lifestyle," but I bet once they have a few people below them on the 757, they'll be bidding it in a heartbeat. Its easier flying than the D8 and RJ, you work fewer days, fly fewer legs, get better coffee/meals, fly to cooler destinations, etc.

[Xander]

+1

[flyer 1492]

You mean WARMER destinations......

[Mig29]

Short haul and Long haul Status pay could work very well at Jazz in my honest opinion.

[teacher]

The fact that FO positions on the '57 went pretty junior and there are new hire spots on the Q400 and CRJ say it all. Status pay works. I still don't see why dividing the pilot group is a good thing. With the exception of a very few 757 pilots the vast majority support status pay from what I've heard.

[Bede]

I worked at Jazz for 4.5 years. Status pay was one of the best things ALPA negotiated. Teacher, I wouldn't even bother with this thread; some people will just never get it.

[TopperHarley]

I dont really think a 1 tier status pay system would solve any problems at AC. Id bet people would still bid the widebodies for the variety of destinations/overseas, working fewer days and flying far fewer legs in a month. I cant see it changing much there. Whether its senior pilots bidding the widebodies for the $$$, or junior pilots bidding it for the metal, it wont make much difference in the end.

Id imagine that if there was no seat lock at Jazz, people would be bidding the 57, RJ and Q400 regardless of the status pay system too. From the senior YYZ RJ FOs I spoke to who didnt bid it, they did so because they were anticipating to go captain in <3 yrs, and the 57 came with a 3 yr seat lock. Once the 757 bid opens system wide, there will definetly be pilots from other bases bidding onto it, even if it means commuting.

The big benefit of the status pay system I think is income stability. Makes for easy financial planning.

[teacher]

I know "Bede" but I can't help myself

As for guys bidding metal there will always be some but some of the most senior guys at Jazz that could hold anything they wanted fly the Dash. MANY MANY MANY folks bid for lifestyle and IMHO should not be penalized for it. As for financial stability and savings yes, it's the way to go for the company.

As for long haul vs short haul it's not all it's cracked up to be. Look overseas. In many places where status pay is the norm senior guys fly short haul. Long haul may allow you to work less days but it's worse for your health and the hours are MUCH longer. You may end up working 10 days but need a recovery day after said pairings which equals 14-15 days away or useless anyway. I don't see why any pilot should be paid more to do the same job. Block hours are block hours, 6 legs or 2 legs who cares. 250 pax twice or 37-50 pax six times, what's the difference?

[Mig29]

As for long haul vs short haul it's not all it's cracked up to be. Look overseas. In many places where status pay is the norm senior guys fly short haul. Long haul may allow you to work less days but it's worse for your health and the hours are MUCH longer. You may end up working 10 days but need a recovery day after said pairings which equals 14-15 days away or useless anyway. I don't see why any pilot should be paid more to do the same job. Block hours are block hours, 6 legs or 2 legs who cares. 250 pax twice or 37-50 pax six times, what's the difference?

We beat to death this status pay thing already, didn't we Teacher So just to be clear, I do understand status pay and the benefits of adding more widebodies to the fleet as the money is shared amongst all pilots...

But! I can not ignore you comment here on the long haul flying. Yes, you are correct to what you have stated above, and for that reason and many more, I stand by my idea that the pay should be higher on long haul flying. Guys are subject to more health hazards flying across the great 'ponds' then are guys doing 2-3hr legs at 25,000'. No where did I say I don't VALUE the work of regional/commuter guys, and in some regard, I would pay them a premium on what they make now, but at the end of the day....you are within +/- 1hr timezone of your own bed, you work relatively "normal" hours (whatever that means in aviation) and you are not subject to radiation, sleep deprivation, being away from home thousands of miles away, and ultimately not being responsible for 200-300pax. So, to sum it up, I would definitively raise pay on both ends of the table, but I'm to nice to ever become a CEO so it won't happen. Therefore, I would make another status pay once you get into 200 pax/ widebody jets doing 6+ hour flights. Or, keep ONE status pay but raise the bottom F/O and top Capt pays significantly that it won't really matter what you fly and so that you can have a normal lifestyle from the get-go. In the realm of say 55-60K to around 150K top end. Maybe someone would argue these figures, and it would depend on the fleet structure ultimately, but like everyone else here you have a right to disagree of course

[teacher]

My point about long haul vs short haul is not that they do more work BUT do less however, IF you include the rest days needed to recover it actually equals the same amount of days not able to do other things. I've flown longer haul aircraft too and can say both have their challenges for different reasons but niether is really harder than the other. Actually I take that back. I've done 8 leg min turn around days, that's work!

In the end I feel that we all work the same amount and should be paid the same. I just did 6 sectors dodging CBs with 3 approaches to minimums and someone's gonna tell me I should be paid less because my plane is smaller when today I carried the same amount of passengers as a "long hauler"? That makes no sense.

[TopperHarley]

In the end I feel that we all work the same amount and should be paid the same. I just did 6 sectors dodging CBs with 3 approaches to minimums and someone's gonna tell me I should be paid less because my plane is smaller when today I carried the same amount of passengers as a "long hauler"? That makes no sense.

I dont think you should be paid less, but with that arguement, one could also say that FOs and Captains should be paid the same. The reason captains make the "big bucks" is because they have more responsibilities. Thats why historically widebody pilots are paid more, in general they have more responsibilities and more lives are in their hands compared to the narrowbody ones.

[Mig29]

I didn't say that regional guys don't work hardER, I'm just stating that the responsibility (in this twisted, unjust and Wall Street lawyers inclined world) on paper is higher for the guys flying bigger equipment. More liability on board and in the hands of the guys at the front, then on board a smaller aircraft. That's all I am stating, it all comes down to $$$ and that's what sucks about this many other industries.
Captains of Ocean liners or super tankers are bound to make more then the guys 'driving' a fishing boat from sunrise to sunset, roughing it in out in sh***y sea conditions only to bring back few shrimps home

Is it fair? No, but ce la vie.

[Dark Helmet]

This topic is irrelevant. At the end of the day is all about dieerent strokes for different folks.

Comparing status pay to formula pay is like comparing Coke to Papsi. Some people like Coke, others like Pepsi, many like both.

Status pay may never work at AC because their fleet is so diverse. WJ and Transat have 1 fleet type. (Transat has 2 but I understand that the 310 will be replaced with 330).

The status pay system is alive and wel at Jazz and it is here to stay. Large majority of the pilots are happy with it. You can count with one hand the number of pilots who are not. Is it the best system? Probably not, but it is the way things are done here.

[flyinhigh]

Well for myself here is my take.

Statues pay is the only way, So many times you here the "oh theres more liability because were a bigger plane." Sorry thats a crock and if you have bought into that than you'll never change your opinion.

I am on the RJ, and yeah I should be paid what the 57 guys are getting paid, you know why? Even If I got 400 people behind me, my view from the flight deck is the same as yours, the fancy door seperating us from the pax is the same, Those cool little plasma screens we all wish picked up TSN are the same, and more importantly whether I am flying a 172 or a 380, the passengers are the same.
When I am on an aircraft I don't think about the passengers at all, I think of my own safety and it just so happens that while i am doing that, the passengers are kept safe.

Do you really think that while flying the RJ I am going to not try and do my best just because I only got 75 folks behind me and not 200.

We are all under the same stress's of every day life in this industry, the aircraft doesn't change that so why should you get paid more because you might get a better cup of JAVA.

[DH772]

The fact that FO positions on the '57 went pretty junior and there are new hire spots on the Q400 and CRJ say it all. Status pay works. I still don't see why dividing the pilot group is a good thing. With the exception of a very few 757 pilots the vast majority support status pay from what I've heard.

I agree to that to a certain extend. Yes there are a lot of positions that are available for the new hires that normally wouldn't be if status pay wasn't implemented. As for the 757, well that just because someone had the bright idea to make it RJ YYZ bid. If it was open to other bases you would NOT be seeing 3 year FO's flying the machines.

I am all for status pay. I think it's a great idea, and it works well. However, when people state we are paid poorly, I have to disagree and agree with them. What a dash captain gets paid is great. Probably one of the best in the world considering the lifestyles they enjoy. As for the 757 drivers? Who negotiated the $155? Sorry but I believe that is underpaid. Just because we operate the machines more to the low cost side does not mean wages should be lower. I mean just take a look across the boarder and compare other 757 drivers:
American Airlines: $174
Continental: $169
Delta: $182
United: $159 (but i'd imagine this will go up with the merge)
FedEx: $218
Then look at AC even an A320 captain makes more then that?

I'm sorry, people can argue what they want but I think the 757 is ENTIRELY underpaid. It should be at $170 minimum and I don't understand how ALPA allowed this low wage to be introduced? Under this logic if heavies were ever to come in the picture jazz would probably only pay their pilots in the 170's???

So yes I agree jazz gets paid well in the overall picture but when it comes to our new work, i strongly believe we're trailing the industry!

just my opinion

DH

[flyinhigh]

. I mean just take a look across the boarder and compare other 757 drivers:
American Airlines: $174
Continental: $169
Delta: $182
United: $159 (but i'd imagine this will go up with the merge)
FedEx: $218
Then look at AC even an A320 captain makes more then that?

I'm sorry, people can argue what they want but I think the 757 is ENTIRELY underpaid. It should be at $170 minimum and I don't understand how ALPA allowed this low wage to be introduced? Under this logic if heavies were ever to come in the picture jazz would probably only pay their pilots in the 170's???


DH

And of all those great companies that you just listed, with the exception of Fedex, how many are in Finacial trouble. Thought so

Sure we could go hirer, however in 3 years we'll join the lot

[dream_big]

And of all those great companies that you just listed, with the exception of Fedex, how many are in Finacial trouble. Thought so

Sure we could go hirer, however in 3 years we'll join the lot

Those airlines are NOT in jeopardy because of the wages they pay their pilots. I'm sorry but pilot wages is NOT the reason why airlines hit finical hardships. It's because the airline is improperly managed. Tell that to southwest/westjet who are amongst the most profitable and best paid airline in North America. Yes you can save a few dollars by paying your employees less but that is not going to make your break you. And if it does then you have a lot bigger issues then pilot wages.