Play The Long Game

[cdnavater]

I don’t think you are understanding that today’s money is worth more than tomorrows. The earnings in year 1,2,3,4… , these days are usually pilots between 25-35 years old most likely with debt to pay off. These are often critical years in a persons life to settle down, but a house and start a family. Let’s say in one proposal a pilot would make 100k more the first 4 years of employment. This 100k could be the difference between being out of debt, qualifying for a mortgage to buy a house and starting their investments early OR none of the above without that 100k. Who cares if 12 years down the line you may potentially have acquired “more” money if 100k in 12 years is worth 30k less anyways and it probably won’t even be more actual net worth to you because you would have lacked an early start on investments.

By having the means to start investing and owning property early in your life is the real goal everybody seems to have forgotten about.

Math may not be my best subject, but clearly you didn't finish 3rd grade math if you can't figure this one out.

A 20k raise on today's salaries working up to a 100k raise on today's salaries is the same thing as a 60k raise working up to a 60k raise. In fact, the 60k today is more valuable than the 100k in 12 years as has been discussed previously. Not sure why this is hard to understand.

I'm not advocating for taking away from current captain salaries. I'm advocating for giving the FOs the same amount of raise. Which just means not giving them as BIG of a raise.

It might be you that failed 3rd grade math, you might want to give it a little think!
To simplify it for you, I made very simple assumptions, I took 30/hr off NB Captain rates and added 30/hr to FO rates, I compounded both at 2% per year after the end of the new scale, first 4 years as NB FO, then NB CA for the remainder of the 12 year scale, compounding is your friend, current(proposed) top scale narrowbody at just 2% per year would be 403.14/hr in 12 years or 367.29 under your take from the top and give to the bottom proposal.
For the pilot starting today at the new scale, upgrading to narrowbody Captain after 4 years(reasonable) they would earn 3,029,326 at 900 hours per year, same pilot under your proposal, same assumption of upgrading after 4 years would make 2,896,147 after 12 years, the gap only gets worse from there.
You will spend many more years on the top scale, you hit that at 12 years and then the rest of your 30-35 year career at that scale, adding 30k to the bottom couple years doesn’t translate into more lifetime earnings, you spend 10% of your career there

Joe, I just realized I may have misunderstood, did you mean 100k extra over the first 4 years? That’s basically what I did when I took 30/hr off new captain pay and applied to new FO pay, if that makes the difference between buying a house or not you’re not managing your money properly.

I understand today’s money is worth more but in my assumptions, I factored 2% per year, over 12 years, so this is assuming next negotiations has nothing but a 2% increase to the new rates, kind of a worse case scenario. 12 years from now the captain top scale 403 vs 367, you also clearly missed the part where if you earn that extra 100k in the first year, after 12 years you are 134,000 less in total earnings, so think of it as interest on your delayed earnings. Without any increase, no compounding, the next 10 years you’ll earn 4 million or 3.6, so your 100k now cost you 400k later, better be a damn good investor to make up that difference!

[DanWEC]

All that's assuming you're a late 20's to 30 low time guy who got hired by AC early. Great for them.

For the rest of the professionals out there, none of which will be WB captain for more than a few years or at all, if they got hired at or after 40, it's still utterly demoralizing and challenging, if not a total detriment, for an experienced pilot to think about AC knowing their already protracted career progression, and still have 4 years of heavily reduced pay at the front end to deal with as well.

[daedalusx]

I don’t think you are understanding that today’s money is worth more than tomorrows. The earnings in year 1,2,3,4… , these days are usually pilots between 25-35 years old most likely with debt to pay off. These are often critical years in a persons life to settle down, but a house and start a family. Let’s say in one proposal a pilot would make 100k more the first 4 years of employment. This 100k could be the difference between being out of debt, qualifying for a mortgage to buy a house and starting their investments early OR none of the above without that 100k. Who cares if 12 years down the line you may potentially have acquired “more” money if 100k in 12 years is worth 30k less anyways and it probably won’t even be more actual net worth to you because you would have lacked an early start on investments.

By having the means to start investing and owning property early in your life is the real goal everybody seems to have forgotten about.

High IQ post right there but the boomers won't relate. They bought their houses in the 'burbs for 80K and sold them for 2.2M

How about @#$! you! Ummmm k!
I didn’t buy my house for 80k, it’s certainly not worth 2.2 million, is that a real thing, not in my part of the country, that’s for damn sure.
You fucktards need to understand compounding raises and you also need to realize there is no scenario where any union gives new hires a 100k raise and zero to the top, you fucktards also need to realize that the pilots at the top have endured a continuous decrease in their discretionary income and lastly, YOU WILL SPEND WAY MORE TIME IN THE TOP THAN THE BOTTOM.
I also had student debt to pay off, took 10 years and I managed to save enough for a down payment on a small house, then sold after 10 years, only managed to double what I paid for it, so if you factor the renovations and interest, I didn’t “profit” off it, current house listed for twice what I paid 15 years ago, many improvements in the 200k range, after interest I might profit 150k off this one, so don’t give me this wealthy boomer crap, I had to file bankruptcy after 9/11 when all the jobs all dried up.
With my extremely generous take 30/hr off the Captain pay and put in on the FO pay, that would be a 50/hr increase from current and it still ended up less after 12 years.
The problem with today’s kids, they want it all fucking now and don’t give a shit where it comes from!

Cool story Capt Cuck. Wondering how long it would take until you would come over to share the wisdoms of selling out the next generation of pilots to protect your keep.
Name me one American Legacy Airline or Regional that
1) Has a B-scale
2) The year 2 WB FO makes less than 1/4th of the Senior WB CA

I guess everyone else has it wrong and ACPA/ALPA is the only airline that has it figured out. Surely that must be why Delta and United go talk to our union leaders to get ideas how to improved their T&C.

[cdnavater]

High IQ post right there but the boomers won't relate. They bought their houses in the 'burbs for 80K and sold them for 2.2M

How about @#$! you! Ummmm k!
I didn’t buy my house for 80k, it’s certainly not worth 2.2 million, is that a real thing, not in my part of the country, that’s for damn sure.
You fucktards need to understand compounding raises and you also need to realize there is no scenario where any union gives new hires a 100k raise and zero to the top, you fucktards also need to realize that the pilots at the top have endured a continuous decrease in their discretionary income and lastly, YOU WILL SPEND WAY MORE TIME IN THE TOP THAN THE BOTTOM.
I also had student debt to pay off, took 10 years and I managed to save enough for a down payment on a small house, then sold after 10 years, only managed to double what I paid for it, so if you factor the renovations and interest, I didn’t “profit” off it, current house listed for twice what I paid 15 years ago, many improvements in the 200k range, after interest I might profit 150k off this one, so don’t give me this wealthy boomer crap, I had to file bankruptcy after 9/11 when all the jobs all dried up.
With my extremely generous take 30/hr off the Captain pay and put in on the FO pay, that would be a 50/hr increase from current and it still ended up less after 12 years.
The problem with today’s kids, they want it all fucking now and don’t give a shit where it comes from!

I'm curious, what do you find an appropriate ratio of pay between an FO and a CPT?

For what it's worth, today's 'kids' are likely the only ones still accepting the low starting wages. The older more established folk in life are likely more inclined to pass.

It was always 66% percent, I have no idea why AC is adamant to keep the flat pay beyond the year 1 though, for all intents and purposes it still goes to year 4, that is when the gap is narrowed. I see it is closer to 55% for the samples I looked at, I am assuming that is to entice FOs to move up to the left seat, I also see that WB FO pay is quite a bit lower than NB CA pay, that will also get people off the FO list.
The intent of the contract was to close the pay gap with other airlines, the top is certainly closer now with this

[North Shore]

Ok, boys, simmer down a little

[khedrei]

The fact is that most people spend much more time at the higher levels of pay than they do at the lower.

Flat pay sucks but you spend 4 years there and then get into the formula grid. Most pilots, by the time they retire, will have spent many, many years as a Capt and many of those as a WB Capt. I get the fact that it's impossible to live on the flat salary - it should be higher. But, imagine if the pay system was re-jigged so that flat pay was $150K/year but WB Capt was only $200K/year or $250K or even $300K? Total lifetime earnings would be lower than the current system.

As I said, flat pay should be higher/eliminated but reducing WB Capt pay to get this is a bad strategy.

Math may not be my best subject, but clearly you didn't finish 3rd grade math if you can't figure this one out.

A 20k raise on today's salaries working up to a 100k raise on today's salaries is the same thing as a 60k raise working up to a 60k raise. In fact, the 60k today is more valuable than the 100k in 12 years as has been discussed previously. Not sure why this is hard to understand.

I'm not advocating for taking away from current captain salaries. I'm advocating for giving the FOs the same amount of raise. Which just means not giving them as BIG of a raise.

It might be you that failed 3rd grade math, you might want to give it a little think!
To simplify it for you, I made very simple assumptions, I took 30/hr off NB Captain rates and added 30/hr to FO rates, I compounded both at 2% per year after the end of the new scale, first 4 years as NB FO, then NB CA for the remainder of the 12 year scale, compounding is your friend, current(proposed) top scale narrowbody at just 2% per year would be 403.14/hr in 12 years or 367.29 under your take from the top and give to the bottom proposal.
For the pilot starting today at the new scale, upgrading to narrowbody Captain after 4 years(reasonable) they would earn 3,029,326 at 900 hours per year, same pilot under your proposal, same assumption of upgrading after 4 years would make 2,896,147 after 12 years, the gap only gets worse from there.
You will spend many more years on the top scale, you hit that at 12 years and then the rest of your 30-35 year career at that scale, adding 30k to the bottom couple years doesn’t translate into more lifetime earnings, you spend 10% of your career there

Yeah, you definitely dont get it.

If the raises were spread equally along the pay scale, EVERYONE with less than 12 years makes MORE money. That includes any increases made to the middle of the scales as well.

Remember that compound interest you were going on about? Well, it applies to the debt that new pilots are trying to pay off and can't because they aren't paid a living wage. It also applies to any money they might have available to invest. Yes, after 12 years the gains drop off, and yes, a raise of 60k for the new guys and old alike would be worse for a 12 year captain than a 100k raise for the old guys and a 20k raise for the new guys. Proof once again that this congract was designed and negotiatied by, for, and to the benefit of the senior guys. A very good reason for the young guys to vote it down and fire them.

A 60k raise for an FO on todays pay rates and a 60k raise of todays pay rates for him down the road are EXACTLY the same amount when it comes to the raw numbers alone. Then, if you include that handy compound interest that you talked about, the first option is even better. It's always better to get money early. Also, 12 years is a long way a way. Very unlikely that 12 year pay rates will still be acceptable/valid, in 12 years.

Have you heard of the expression "Money doesn't buy happiness. Well, it does, but only up to 75k per year. After that the happiness factor drops off quickly". That was a figure quoted 10-15 years ago and it was in USD, so lets let its 150k CAD today. If you are going to try and convince me a sr captain is going to struggle only making 310k instead of 350k, you will first have to convince me that he can fly without the aid of technology. I however, wouldn't have trouble convincing anyone that a FO living in YYZ, YVR or YUL will struggle making 78k.

I am genuinly curious where the break even point is for equalling out the raises. I would venture to guess that given an average economy, interest rates, etc, it would probably take until year 18 or so where the benefit of the big money at yr 12 starts to pull away from the increased earnings earlier in your career. And as previous posters mentioned, what about the guys who will never be captain? What about the guys who are 40 when they start and will never see a WB? They shouldn't be paid a living wage just so the 12 year guy can buy another boat?

That 12 year 77 CA isn't going anywhere. They aren't quitting if they get 100k raise, 50k, or 0. They still won't leave. The new guys on the other hand, they don't have anything to lose.

What kind of weird mental gymnastics would it take to want the job bad enough that you'd swallow the bullshit initial pay, only to quit after you get 40% raise?

I'll ask you a question. Whats 40% of nothing? % doesn't mean much when the number is so small to begin with. The real world operates in raw numbers. You can only eat so much food, and own so many houses.

[just clearing the trees]

Except it's not nothing, clearly. It's the wage that every single new hire over the last 10 years has willingly accepted as sufficient to go do that job. And now it's 40% more than that.

[khedrei]

You are certainly right. That is a 100% correct statement. My point was simply that when considering an increase to it, % needed to be thrown out the window. A proper look at a living wage needed to be considered regardless of how many % points higher than the existing one it was.

The trouble now, with the old guys being offered a 100k increase, even if this were to be voted down, the union will never be able to shave anything off of that figure to give more to the new guys. The only way they will get it is to be able to convince the company to dig deeper into their dark pockets and give it.

[just clearing the trees]

If the wage isn't liveable at 140%, people probably shouldn't have been applying when it was only 100%. And yet they did. In droves.

[thrust set]

Hey, have a question,
So what will the F/O’s be making on the new pay scale after they complete year 2 on the 777/787/330 and factor 80 credits/mth and Nav/Overseas pay.

I was just told no pilots completing year 2 would make more than 85K.

[cdnavater]

Hey, have a question,
So what will the F/O’s be making on the new pay scale after they complete year 2 on the 777/787/330 and factor 80 credits/mth and Nav/Overseas pay.

I was just told no pilots completing year 2 would make more than 85K.

After year 2, you would be on formula pay, so 777 FO rate is 155.53 Sept/26, so a pilot starting this year, after two years employment on the 777 would make about 149,000. I’m not sure if the new rates are fixed and include Nav pay, night pay, overseas pay they only have a pay rate table and no mention of the others, it could be a blended rate now. The 787, 330 and 67 are less but not 85k, we’re talking about 125,000 on the 67 and 140ish on the 787/330.

[‘Bob’]

It amazes me that people still apply to AC. I guess if you’re super conservative on wanting stability and you wanna do long haul flying it would make sense? Other than that I seriously can’t figure it out. I was fairly certain I wouldn’t ever apply to AC leading up to seeing this TA, now I’m extremely certain. Think I’ll be much happier where I’m at.

This is exactly what a junior, inexperienced person would say. I said those exact words myself when I was that person, "I'd be happy flying this Dash 8 for the rest of my career. Home most nights, no stress, blah, blah,blah." Then you get a little older, the flying becomes boring, the destinations become boring and the paycheque - well, not so good. You start to think - "If I had gone to AC 10 years ago I'd be a 320 Capt or a 787 FO, or living back in Vancouver, whatever."

Long haul flying isn't about long haul flying. It's about layovers in interesting place, working fewer days/month, bigger paycheques.

Wow. New Delhi or Tokyo must be so fun for the 6th time for only a few hours jetlagged AF with people you don’t know.

I like going where I want to go with people I want to go with for weeks or months.

And I mean, if I had 20,000 hours and it was all on autopilot over repetitive routes I’d be bored of flying, too. I don’t have 20,000 hours. I don’t even have 10,000 hours. In fact if I play my cards right I won’t break 10,000 hours before I retire.

Money? Can’t argue with that. But there’s a real cost to it, too. The longer you have your number… the more invested you are in the company and the more its destiny and shenanigans affect your life.

From the absolute demoralizing starting pay and conditions to grinding your way up to upgrade and base and equipment and routes to knowing that this it…anywhere else you go you will have to start at the bottom again. Golden handcuffs.

One of the things that keeps me going is freedom. That my life is at a level where I could leave my company or aviation entirely and still be as well off. But I won’t because it’s still too much fun.

Is that junior and inexperienced? Two decades in and I haven’t even flown a Dash 8 yet!

[Man_in_the_sky]

Only good thing for junior fo is another 4 year being invited for dinner by the captain.
Other than that, it’s dog shit.

[acaintgotme]

Typical pilot. All bite, no bark…..friends until the end, or until it’s just about me. Comical: “hold the line”. Haha…thanks for the laugh clowns.

[cdnavater]

Math may not be my best subject, but clearly you didn't finish 3rd grade math if you can't figure this one out.

A 20k raise on today's salaries working up to a 100k raise on today's salaries is the same thing as a 60k raise working up to a 60k raise. In fact, the 60k today is more valuable than the 100k in 12 years as has been discussed previously. Not sure why this is hard to understand.

I'm not advocating for taking away from current captain salaries. I'm advocating for giving the FOs the same amount of raise. Which just means not giving them as BIG of a raise.

It might be you that failed 3rd grade math, you might want to give it a little think!
To simplify it for you, I made very simple assumptions, I took 30/hr off NB Captain rates and added 30/hr to FO rates, I compounded both at 2% per year after the end of the new scale, first 4 years as NB FO, then NB CA for the remainder of the 12 year scale, compounding is your friend, current(proposed) top scale narrowbody at just 2% per year would be 403.14/hr in 12 years or 367.29 under your take from the top and give to the bottom proposal.
For the pilot starting today at the new scale, upgrading to narrowbody Captain after 4 years(reasonable) they would earn 3,029,326 at 900 hours per year, same pilot under your proposal, same assumption of upgrading after 4 years would make 2,896,147 after 12 years, the gap only gets worse from there.
You will spend many more years on the top scale, you hit that at 12 years and then the rest of your 30-35 year career at that scale, adding 30k to the bottom couple years doesn’t translate into more lifetime earnings, you spend 10% of your career there

Yeah, you definitely dont get it.

If the raises were spread equally along the pay scale, EVERYONE with less than 12 years makes MORE money. That includes any increases made to the middle of the scales as well.

Remember that compound interest you were going on about? Well, it applies to the debt that new pilots are trying to pay off and can't because they aren't paid a living wage. It also applies to any money they might have available to invest. Yes, after 12 years the gains drop off, and yes, a raise of 60k for the new guys and old alike would be worse for a 12 year captain than a 100k raise for the old guys and a 20k raise for the new guys. Proof once again that this congract was designed and negotiatied by, for, and to the benefit of the senior guys. A very good reason for the young guys to vote it down and fire them.

A 60k raise for an FO on todays pay rates and a 60k raise of todays pay rates for him down the road are EXACTLY the same amount when it comes to the raw numbers alone. Then, if you include that handy compound interest that you talked about, the first option is even better. It's always better to get money early. Also, 12 years is a long way a way. Very unlikely that 12 year pay rates will still be acceptable/valid, in 12 years.

Have you heard of the expression "Money doesn't buy happiness. Well, it does, but only up to 75k per year. After that the happiness factor drops off quickly". That was a figure quoted 10-15 years ago and it was in USD, so lets let its 150k CAD today. If you are going to try and convince me a sr captain is going to struggle only making 310k instead of 350k, you will first have to convince me that he can fly without the aid of technology. I however, wouldn't have trouble convincing anyone that a FO living in YYZ, YVR or YUL will struggle making 78k.

I am genuinly curious where the break even point is for equalling out the raises. I would venture to guess that given an average economy, interest rates, etc, it would probably take until year 18 or so where the benefit of the big money at yr 12 starts to pull away from the increased earnings earlier in your career. And as previous posters mentioned, what about the guys who will never be captain? What about the guys who are 40 when they start and will never see a WB? They shouldn't be paid a living wage just so the 12 year guy can buy another boat?

That 12 year 77 CA isn't going anywhere. They aren't quitting if they get 100k raise, 50k, or 0. They still won't leave. The new guys on the other hand, they don't have anything to lose.

What kind of weird mental gymnastics would it take to want the job bad enough that you'd swallow the bullshit initial pay, only to quit after you get 40% raise?

I'll ask you a question. Whats 40% of nothing? % doesn't mean much when the number is so small to begin with. The real world operates in raw numbers. You can only eat so much food, and own so many houses.

I responded to you in another thread about the same thing but here it is, 20 year earnings based on taking another 30/hr off the Captain scale and applying it the the FO scale. That would be a total raise for FO of 50/hr, only did first fours years of FO because if you’re still a NB FO after fours years, year 5 goes up 50/hr already. You really have not thought this through very well, do the work yourself, actually take the scale for both adjust it how you feel it should be and then run the numbers for just an inflationary raise, you will see that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is not what you think it is, it just not!
If you don’t believe my numbers, run them yourself, I did the work for you!


“It’s you that doesn’t get it, I spelled it out like I would to a third grader,
I took 30/hr off the Captain pay, applied it to FO pay, over 12 years you will earn 130,000 less.
At only 2% per year increase @900 hours/yr;
The 12 year Captain pay untouched, in 12 years is 403, 13-411.20, 14-419.43, 15-427.86, 16-436.37, 17-445.09, 18-453.99, 19-463.07, 20-472.33
The 12 year Captain pay your way, in 12 years is 367.29, 13-374.66, 14-382.12, 15-389.77, 16-397.46, 17-405.52, 18-413.62, 19-421.90, 20-430.34
20 years=6,204,922
20 years=5,789,998
Difference of 414,924 over 20 years!
So, YOU would rather have an extra 30/hr over the new rates, take away that 30 from the Captain rate, earn an extra 120k over the first 4 years instead of 415k over 20, you might want to rethink your stance!
The new contract should have been better for the first 4 years, no question but not at the expense of future earnings! After 4 years, if you’re still an FO, the pay goes up between 40 and 50/hr depending on pay group, so no point in jigging with all the numbers, 4 years as FO currently is a reasonable assumption, you will earn far more over your career by not taking from the top to give to the bottom. After the first four years the FO pay seems to be tied to some formula at around 55-60% of Captain pay, could be better there too but the math is the math, higher Captain pay will equate to higher FO pay.
If you still don’t see it, well, what can I say, do the math yourself“

[khedrei]

It might be you that failed 3rd grade math, you might want to give it a little think!
To simplify it for you, I made very simple assumptions, I took 30/hr off NB Captain rates and added 30/hr to FO rates, I compounded both at 2% per year after the end of the new scale, first 4 years as NB FO, then NB CA for the remainder of the 12 year scale, compounding is your friend, current(proposed) top scale narrowbody at just 2% per year would be 403.14/hr in 12 years or 367.29 under your take from the top and give to the bottom proposal.
For the pilot starting today at the new scale, upgrading to narrowbody Captain after 4 years(reasonable) they would earn 3,029,326 at 900 hours per year, same pilot under your proposal, same assumption of upgrading after 4 years would make 2,896,147 after 12 years, the gap only gets worse from there.
You will spend many more years on the top scale, you hit that at 12 years and then the rest of your 30-35 year career at that scale, adding 30k to the bottom couple years doesn’t translate into more lifetime earnings, you spend 10% of your career there

Yeah, you definitely dont get it.

If the raises were spread equally along the pay scale, EVERYONE with less than 12 years makes MORE money. That includes any increases made to the middle of the scales as well.

Remember that compound interest you were going on about? Well, it applies to the debt that new pilots are trying to pay off and can't because they aren't paid a living wage. It also applies to any money they might have available to invest. Yes, after 12 years the gains drop off, and yes, a raise of 60k for the new guys and old alike would be worse for a 12 year captain than a 100k raise for the old guys and a 20k raise for the new guys. Proof once again that this congract was designed and negotiatied by, for, and to the benefit of the senior guys. A very good reason for the young guys to vote it down and fire them.

A 60k raise for an FO on todays pay rates and a 60k raise of todays pay rates for him down the road are EXACTLY the same amount when it comes to the raw numbers alone. Then, if you include that handy compound interest that you talked about, the first option is even better. It's always better to get money early. Also, 12 years is a long way a way. Very unlikely that 12 year pay rates will still be acceptable/valid, in 12 years.

Have you heard of the expression "Money doesn't buy happiness. Well, it does, but only up to 75k per year. After that the happiness factor drops off quickly". That was a figure quoted 10-15 years ago and it was in USD, so lets let its 150k CAD today. If you are going to try and convince me a sr captain is going to struggle only making 310k instead of 350k, you will first have to convince me that he can fly without the aid of technology. I however, wouldn't have trouble convincing anyone that a FO living in YYZ, YVR or YUL will struggle making 78k.

I am genuinly curious where the break even point is for equalling out the raises. I would venture to guess that given an average economy, interest rates, etc, it would probably take until year 18 or so where the benefit of the big money at yr 12 starts to pull away from the increased earnings earlier in your career. And as previous posters mentioned, what about the guys who will never be captain? What about the guys who are 40 when they start and will never see a WB? They shouldn't be paid a living wage just so the 12 year guy can buy another boat?

What kind of weird mental gymnastics would it take to want the job bad enough that you'd swallow the bullshit initial pay, only to quit after you get 40% raise?

I'll ask you a question. Whats 40% of nothing? % doesn't mean much when the number is so small to begin with. The real world operates in raw numbers. You can only eat so much food, and own so many houses.

I responded to you in another thread about the same thing but here it is, 20 year earnings based on taking another 30/hr off the Captain scale and applying it the the FO scale. That would be a total raise for FO of 50/hr, only did first fours years of FO because if you’re still a NB FO after fours years, year 5 goes up 50/hr already. You really have not thought this through very well, do the work yourself, actually take the scale for both adjust it how you feel it should be and then run the numbers for just an inflationary raise, you will see that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is not what you think it is, it just not!
If you don’t believe my numbers, run them yourself, I did the work for you!


“It’s you that doesn’t get it, I spelled it out like I would to a third grader,
I took 30/hr off the Captain pay, applied it to FO pay, over 12 years you will earn 130,000 less.
At only 2% per year increase @900 hours/yr;
The 12 year Captain pay untouched, in 12 years is 403, 13-411.20, 14-419.43, 15-427.86, 16-436.37, 17-445.09, 18-453.99, 19-463.07, 20-472.33
The 12 year Captain pay your way, in 12 years is 367.29, 13-374.66, 14-382.12, 15-389.77, 16-397.46, 17-405.52, 18-413.62, 19-421.90, 20-430.34
20 years=6,204,922
20 years=5,789,998
Difference of 414,924 over 20 years!
So, YOU would rather have an extra 30/hr over the new rates, take away that 30 from the Captain rate, earn an extra 120k over the first 4 years instead of 415k over 20, you might want to rethink your stance!
The new contract should have been better for the first 4 years, no question but not at the expense of future earnings! After 4 years, if you’re still an FO, the pay goes up between 40 and 50/hr depending on pay group, so no point in jigging with all the numbers, 4 years as FO currently is a reasonable assumption, you will earn far more over your career by not taking from the top to give to the bottom. After the first four years the FO pay seems to be tied to some formula at around 55-60% of Captain pay, could be better there too but the math is the math, higher Captain pay will equate to higher FO pay.
If you still don’t see it, well, what can I say, do the math yourself“

I totally get it. It's you that doesn't get it. I don't care about this fantasy 2% per year number that you made up and applied to this. I understand the math. I believe you that it's right I don't even need to do it myself. 2% compounded at current caprain rates adds up and we "might" get 2% per year so we better keep the captain pay high because 2% on big numbers is bigger than 2% on small numbers. It's just not relevant to my point. Today's money is way more valuable than tomorrow's. When interest rates on debt and money a person could be investing at 5-10% or more today, getting that money today is worth more than waiting for it at 2%. That 2% you talk about compounding in the tables through the years is irrelevant as no one knows what the economic situation will be or if those rates will be readjusted before 12 years from now anyway. If the money a person could invest today at 5-7% is compounded, or debt they could pay off at 7-12%+ it would be worth much more than the rates you talk about compounding at 2%

Nevermind the fact that year 1-4 still doesn't compete with flair.

Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years.

I also agree that after the 12 years, the early money has dismissing returns.

This contract benefits the 12 year guys and captains the most and won't benefit too many FOs a whole lot for several years.

I also just found out that they upped the MMG to 84 hours. So while the rates are higher, you also have to work more hours which means the raise isn't as big as it appears on an annual basis and your schedules just got worse.

And yes, using your model and answering your question, I would absolutely prefer to take the 120k in the first 4 years than to take the 400k spread out over 20 years. That's a no brainer. I'm not sure who on earth wouldn't. Then again, let's listen to the guy who declared bankruptcy. Nevermind, it makes sense now.

[Protonpilot]

"Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years."

We have 70 aircraft on order. Most of that is growth.

Where do you come up with 10 years for an upgrade? Right now it's two years for an upgrade to NB CA, about 11 years for a WB CA.

At some point the music will slow down and even stop. But our retirements (assuming we stay at age 65) are about 100/year, increasing to over 200/year twenty years from now based on the enormous amount of hiring we've done over the last ten years. We've added 3500 in the past twelve years (that's how many members I've been told are on the new pension plan).

You're right. The music will stop. But for anybody currently on the property, i.e. who is assessing this deal and the impact of the new rates on their career earnings, it's still a pretty steep upward curve just based on vacancies available from retirements and firm orders. Nobody voting on this deal is looking at a 10 year upgrade.

[Whatsagambit?]

I'd just like to point out something that I don't think has really been discussed here on these forums. You all voting to keep FO pay low also reduces the chance that Flair, Porter, or WestJet need to increase their wages to compete with Air Canada. So there's an opportunity cost you aren't factoring in with these calculations.

Look back one year where Porter deciding to expand their operations decided that they needed to pay their pilots more in order to do so. At the same time they also started trying to poach Jazz and Encore pilots by offering the same YoS on the Q and also a signing bonus for qualified captains. Within a month Jazz had a new MOS proposal where Air Canada finally decided that more money was needed for the pilots in order to stop the bleeding. Encore/WJ didn't really do anything and as a result half their fleet is parked and their numbers have dwindled considerably.

Voting for shit starting FO pay is also a vote for not competing with any other Canadian airlines. If you instead vote for higher FO pay then there is a good chance that Flair, Porter and WestJet will have to up their game as well. The whole point of this proposed TA is that Air Canada doesn't want a wage spiral like we saw in the US. Also to split the pilot group so it passes. At least that's how I see it.

Within a week you guys have gone from "We need QOL improvements, and scope, and better working conditions, and better pay, especially for the FOs. Now you are at the point where you don't care about those QOL conditions, or scope, or better pay for FOs because they don't really need it since they don't spend much time there.

Whatever your position I think we can all agree that this contract wasn't at all what you wanted a week ago. Also that captains making 4-5 times the amount that FOs make is ridiculous. The rest of Canadas aviation sector is hoping you guys will finally tell AC enough is enough. But here you are all once again at each other's throats. For all our sakes I hope you can at least remember who the enemy is.

[rudder]

"Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years."

We have 70 aircraft on order. Most of that is growth.

Where do you come up with 10 years for an upgrade? Right now it's two years for an upgrade to NB CA, about 11 years for a WB CA.

At some point the music will slow down and even stop. But our retirements (assuming we stay at age 65) are about 100/year, increasing to over 200/year twenty years from now based on the enormous amount of hiring we've done over the last ten years. We've added 3500 in the past twelve years (that's how many members I've been told are on the new pension plan).

You're right. The music will stop. But for anybody currently on the property, i.e. who is assessing this deal and the impact of the new rates on their career earnings, it's still a pretty steep upward curve just based on vacancies available from retirements and firm orders. Nobody voting on this deal is looking at a 10 year upgrade.

Just for accuracy…..

Not EVERY 2nd year pilot can hold NB CA. A handful can because hundreds of more senior pilots did not bid NB CA. Same applies to the single 11th year WB CA. Clearly the reclassification of the 767F will have a short term impact on that assessment.

[Protonpilot]

Just for accuracy…..

Not EVERY 2nd year pilot can hold NB CA. A handful can because hundreds of more senior pilots did not bid NB CA. Same applies to the single 11th year WB CA. Clearly the reclassification of the 767F will have a short term impact on that assessment.

What's a handful to you? Just looked at our latest equipment bid. About 160 NB CA with two years on the property, all in UL and YZ.

You're right about the WB CA, 11 years is the absolute bottom WB CA. But where it used to take 25 years just to hold the bottom slot CA B767 (our most junior WB CA) somebody with 12 years is now at 75% on the A330 CA UL list with 30 slots below. That's a blockholder or fairly senior reserve if you choose.

Don't see much change in that in the next five years with aircraft orders.

There will always be senior guys who want to stay in the top 10% of their list for lifestyle. Our position assignment has never been pure seniority. Always some that choose lifestyle, others who choose earnings. And that bidding behaviour hasn't really changed for members on the DB plan, our old DC plan, and our new CWIPP plan.

[cdnavater]

Yeah, you definitely dont get it.

If the raises were spread equally along the pay scale, EVERYONE with less than 12 years makes MORE money. That includes any increases made to the middle of the scales as well.

Remember that compound interest you were going on about? Well, it applies to the debt that new pilots are trying to pay off and can't because they aren't paid a living wage. It also applies to any money they might have available to invest. Yes, after 12 years the gains drop off, and yes, a raise of 60k for the new guys and old alike would be worse for a 12 year captain than a 100k raise for the old guys and a 20k raise for the new guys. Proof once again that this congract was designed and negotiatied by, for, and to the benefit of the senior guys. A very good reason for the young guys to vote it down and fire them.

A 60k raise for an FO on todays pay rates and a 60k raise of todays pay rates for him down the road are EXACTLY the same amount when it comes to the raw numbers alone. Then, if you include that handy compound interest that you talked about, the first option is even better. It's always better to get money early. Also, 12 years is a long way a way. Very unlikely that 12 year pay rates will still be acceptable/valid, in 12 years.

Have you heard of the expression "Money doesn't buy happiness. Well, it does, but only up to 75k per year. After that the happiness factor drops off quickly". That was a figure quoted 10-15 years ago and it was in USD, so lets let its 150k CAD today. If you are going to try and convince me a sr captain is going to struggle only making 310k instead of 350k, you will first have to convince me that he can fly without the aid of technology. I however, wouldn't have trouble convincing anyone that a FO living in YYZ, YVR or YUL will struggle making 78k.

I am genuinly curious where the break even point is for equalling out the raises. I would venture to guess that given an average economy, interest rates, etc, it would probably take until year 18 or so where the benefit of the big money at yr 12 starts to pull away from the increased earnings earlier in your career. And as previous posters mentioned, what about the guys who will never be captain? What about the guys who are 40 when they start and will never see a WB? They shouldn't be paid a living wage just so the 12 year guy can buy another boat?



I'll ask you a question. Whats 40% of nothing? % doesn't mean much when the number is so small to begin with. The real world operates in raw numbers. You can only eat so much food, and own so many houses.

I responded to you in another thread about the same thing but here it is, 20 year earnings based on taking another 30/hr off the Captain scale and applying it the the FO scale. That would be a total raise for FO of 50/hr, only did first fours years of FO because if you’re still a NB FO after fours years, year 5 goes up 50/hr already. You really have not thought this through very well, do the work yourself, actually take the scale for both adjust it how you feel it should be and then run the numbers for just an inflationary raise, you will see that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is not what you think it is, it just not!
If you don’t believe my numbers, run them yourself, I did the work for you!


“It’s you that doesn’t get it, I spelled it out like I would to a third grader,
I took 30/hr off the Captain pay, applied it to FO pay, over 12 years you will earn 130,000 less.
At only 2% per year increase @900 hours/yr;
The 12 year Captain pay untouched, in 12 years is 403, 13-411.20, 14-419.43, 15-427.86, 16-436.37, 17-445.09, 18-453.99, 19-463.07, 20-472.33
The 12 year Captain pay your way, in 12 years is 367.29, 13-374.66, 14-382.12, 15-389.77, 16-397.46, 17-405.52, 18-413.62, 19-421.90, 20-430.34
20 years=6,204,922
20 years=5,789,998
Difference of 414,924 over 20 years!
So, YOU would rather have an extra 30/hr over the new rates, take away that 30 from the Captain rate, earn an extra 120k over the first 4 years instead of 415k over 20, you might want to rethink your stance!
The new contract should have been better for the first 4 years, no question but not at the expense of future earnings! After 4 years, if you’re still an FO, the pay goes up between 40 and 50/hr depending on pay group, so no point in jigging with all the numbers, 4 years as FO currently is a reasonable assumption, you will earn far more over your career by not taking from the top to give to the bottom. After the first four years the FO pay seems to be tied to some formula at around 55-60% of Captain pay, could be better there too but the math is the math, higher Captain pay will equate to higher FO pay.
If you still don’t see it, well, what can I say, do the math yourself“

I totally get it. It's you that doesn't get it. I don't care about this fantasy 2% per year number that you made up and applied to this. I understand the math. I believe you that it's right I don't even need to do it myself. 2% compounded at current caprain rates adds up and we "might" get 2% per year so we better keep the captain pay high because 2% on big numbers is bigger than 2% on small numbers. It's just not relevant to my point. Today's money is way more valuable than tomorrow's. When interest rates on debt and money a person could be investing at 5-10% or more today, getting that money today is worth more than waiting for it at 2%. That 2% you talk about compounding in the tables through the years is irrelevant as no one knows what the economic situation will be or if those rates will be readjusted before 12 years from now anyway. If the money a person could invest today at 5-7% is compounded, or debt they could pay off at 7-12%+ it would be worth much more than the rates you talk about compounding at 2%

Nevermind the fact that year 1-4 still doesn't compete with flair.

Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years.

I also agree that after the 12 years, the early money has dismissing returns.

This contract benefits the 12 year guys and captains the most and won't benefit too many FOs a whole lot for several years.

I also just found out that they upped the MMG to 84 hours. So while the rates are higher, you also have to work more hours which means the raise isn't as big as it appears on an annual basis and your schedules just got worse.

And yes, using your model and answering your question, I would absolutely prefer to take the 120k in the first 4 years than to take the 400k spread out over 20 years. That's a no brainer. I'm not sure who on earth wouldn't. Then again, let's listen to the guy who declared bankruptcy. Nevermind, it makes sense now.

Ok, it’s clear now, you’re an unreasonable person, got it!
I learned a few things from my decades in the business, one of those is always have 4 months of bills in your savings and don’t start a side business using your personal credit and money, when the economy tanks, you could literally be starting over from scratch, glad you can take my personal past mistakes and use it for you completely illogical stance!
I’m glad you get the math, I just don’t understand how you think 120k spread out over fours years will somehow compound and make up for the loss of half a million dollars down the road!
Just for shiggles, I put 120k into an investment calculator, very generous since you would have been taxed on that but I digress, your 120k even as a lump sum and invested at a 5% return over 20 years, returns you 30k, even if you manage to invest an additional 10,000 per year, you end up with 355k over 20 years. Your logic is faulty, a few years of lower income, tighten your belt a little for the longer term payout! Remember, after the four years the FO rate goes up already at 40-50/hr, so in reality we are only talking about the first 4 years that is deficient!

[throwawaycorporate]

..

It's not all math and career earnings..

- The most tax efficient earning is exactly your average career earnings. So rather than 80KFO and 320K CA, you're keeping more net making 200K over two years. Of course this isn't possible as a pilot but your calculations do not account for this. On the longer scale, lifetime earnings matter of course but the smaller the split, the more tax favourable it will become.

- Each raise does not carry the same $ value like your example suggests. If you have fixed costs of $4000/month and make $5000/month, a raise to $6000/month effectively doubles your spendable income, while if you have fixed costs of $9000/month and make $18000/month, the raise to $22000 is bigger in absolute terms but has a smaller percentage impact on your life.

- It's not just money that matters more now, it's time. Many potential AC pilots are at the stage of life where it makes sense to buy a property and start a family. These new rates do not support that lifestyle for new hires. If you need to wait until year 5 to buy a house or have a kid, that time is gone and no amount of money on the top end can buy that back.

- Industry standard ratio is 66% CA/FO. My view is that you want to be able to create a comfortable atmosphere in the cockpit and captains should support this ratio. Not to mention it provides more choice in career progression.

As someone on the outside here I think a solution would be to adjust the ratio to 66% regardless if that means taking some from the top end (although ideally not), after that the focus really should be on clarifying QOL stuff. 100% DH's as an example. Flexibility to drop x hours per month if desired, vacation adjustment immediately, minimum daily pay not on an averaged basis, etc.

Also why do you call people names?

[khedrei]

I responded to you in another thread about the same thing but here it is, 20 year earnings based on taking another 30/hr off the Captain scale and applying it the the FO scale. That would be a total raise for FO of 50/hr, only did first fours years of FO because if you’re still a NB FO after fours years, year 5 goes up 50/hr already. You really have not thought this through very well, do the work yourself, actually take the scale for both adjust it how you feel it should be and then run the numbers for just an inflationary raise, you will see that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is not what you think it is, it just not!
If you don’t believe my numbers, run them yourself, I did the work for you!


“It’s you that doesn’t get it, I spelled it out like I would to a third grader,
I took 30/hr off the Captain pay, applied it to FO pay, over 12 years you will earn 130,000 less.
At only 2% per year increase @900 hours/yr;
The 12 year Captain pay untouched, in 12 years is 403, 13-411.20, 14-419.43, 15-427.86, 16-436.37, 17-445.09, 18-453.99, 19-463.07, 20-472.33
The 12 year Captain pay your way, in 12 years is 367.29, 13-374.66, 14-382.12, 15-389.77, 16-397.46, 17-405.52, 18-413.62, 19-421.90, 20-430.34
20 years=6,204,922
20 years=5,789,998
Difference of 414,924 over 20 years!
So, YOU would rather have an extra 30/hr over the new rates, take away that 30 from the Captain rate, earn an extra 120k over the first 4 years instead of 415k over 20, you might want to rethink your stance!
The new contract should have been better for the first 4 years, no question but not at the expense of future earnings! After 4 years, if you’re still an FO, the pay goes up between 40 and 50/hr depending on pay group, so no point in jigging with all the numbers, 4 years as FO currently is a reasonable assumption, you will earn far more over your career by not taking from the top to give to the bottom. After the first four years the FO pay seems to be tied to some formula at around 55-60% of Captain pay, could be better there too but the math is the math, higher Captain pay will equate to higher FO pay.
If you still don’t see it, well, what can I say, do the math yourself“

I totally get it. It's you that doesn't get it. I don't care about this fantasy 2% per year number that you made up and applied to this. I understand the math. I believe you that it's right I don't even need to do it myself. 2% compounded at current caprain rates adds up and we "might" get 2% per year so we better keep the captain pay high because 2% on big numbers is bigger than 2% on small numbers. It's just not relevant to my point. Today's money is way more valuable than tomorrow's. When interest rates on debt and money a person could be investing at 5-10% or more today, getting that money today is worth more than waiting for it at 2%. That 2% you talk about compounding in the tables through the years is irrelevant as no one knows what the economic situation will be or if those rates will be readjusted before 12 years from now anyway. If the money a person could invest today at 5-7% is compounded, or debt they could pay off at 7-12%+ it would be worth much more than the rates you talk about compounding at 2%

Nevermind the fact that year 1-4 still doesn't compete with flair.

Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years.

I also agree that after the 12 years, the early money has dismissing returns.

This contract benefits the 12 year guys and captains the most and won't benefit too many FOs a whole lot for several years.

I also just found out that they upped the MMG to 84 hours. So while the rates are higher, you also have to work more hours which means the raise isn't as big as it appears on an annual basis and your schedules just got worse.

And yes, using your model and answering your question, I would absolutely prefer to take the 120k in the first 4 years than to take the 400k spread out over 20 years. That's a no brainer. I'm not sure who on earth wouldn't. Then again, let's listen to the guy who declared bankruptcy. Nevermind, it makes sense now.

Ok, it’s clear now, you’re an unreasonable person, got it!
I learned a few things from my decades in the business, one of those is always have 4 months of bills in your savings and don’t start a side business using your personal credit and money, when the economy tanks, you could literally be starting over from scratch, glad you can take my personal past mistakes and use it for you completely illogical stance!
I’m glad you get the math, I just don’t understand how you think 120k spread out over fours years will somehow compound and make up for the loss of half a million dollars down the road!
Just for shiggles, I put 120k into an investment calculator, very generous since you would have been taxed on that but I digress, your 120k even as a lump sum and invested at a 5% return over 20 years, returns you 30k, even if you manage to invest an additional 10,000 per year, you end up with 355k over 20 years. Your logic is faulty, a few years of lower income, tighten your belt a little for the longer term payout! Remember, after the four years the FO rate goes up already at 40-50/hr, so in reality we are only talking about the first 4 years that is deficient!

You're not even using your own numbers now. You say half a million now yet before you said 415k. And the difference between 415k and 120k is 295k.

So yes, I think that in 16 years, I could recoup that 295k difference whether it be from investing or not paying interest debt.

Also, the credit card companies don't take IOUs.

The people living off their line of credit for 4 years are real. Average cose of a line of credit, 6-12%.

When you can't pay your bills or your standard of living is suffering, you have to work a part time job it's not just about what kind of return you can get on your money now vs later. It's about quality of life. The union showed who's quality of life they care about.

Don't worry, I don't need to learn from your mistakes. I wouldnt take financial advice from you the same way I wouldn't my money manager cousin who lost his house cause he couldn't manage his money.

I'm 39 and work is optional for me. I could retire modestly today. I never made more than 122k plus some modest side jobs. I'm a living example of how today's money is more valuable than tomorrow's.

Totally unreasonable to not want to have to work a second job or have your captain make 3-5 times your wage to do the same job.

Don't worry next time the union will take care of the young guys. Probably. But if not then, for sure the time after that.

[khedrei]

..

Also why do you call people names?

Its because he's a bully. It's ok though. I have broad shoulders.

You missed the one where he asked a guy to meet for a fight. Mods deleted it.

[cdnavater]

Yeah, you definitely dont get it.

If the raises were spread equally along the pay scale, EVERYONE with less than 12 years makes MORE money. That includes any increases made to the middle of the scales as well.

Remember that compound interest you were going on about? Well, it applies to the debt that new pilots are trying to pay off and can't because they aren't paid a living wage. It also applies to any money they might have available to invest. Yes, after 12 years the gains drop off, and yes, a raise of 60k for the new guys and old alike would be worse for a 12 year captain than a 100k raise for the old guys and a 20k raise for the new guys. Proof once again that this congract was designed and negotiatied by, for, and to the benefit of the senior guys. A very good reason for the young guys to vote it down and fire them.

A 60k raise for an FO on todays pay rates and a 60k raise of todays pay rates for him down the road are EXACTLY the same amount when it comes to the raw numbers alone. Then, if you include that handy compound interest that you talked about, the first option is even better. It's always better to get money early. Also, 12 years is a long way a way. Very unlikely that 12 year pay rates will still be acceptable/valid, in 12 years.

Have you heard of the expression "Money doesn't buy happiness. Well, it does, but only up to 75k per year. After that the happiness factor drops off quickly". That was a figure quoted 10-15 years ago and it was in USD, so lets let its 150k CAD today. If you are going to try and convince me a sr captain is going to struggle only making 310k instead of 350k, you will first have to convince me that he can fly without the aid of technology. I however, wouldn't have trouble convincing anyone that a FO living in YYZ, YVR or YUL will struggle making 78k.

I am genuinly curious where the break even point is for equalling out the raises. I would venture to guess that given an average economy, interest rates, etc, it would probably take until year 18 or so where the benefit of the big money at yr 12 starts to pull away from the increased earnings earlier in your career. And as previous posters mentioned, what about the guys who will never be captain? What about the guys who are 40 when they start and will never see a WB? They shouldn't be paid a living wage just so the 12 year guy can buy another boat?



I'll ask you a question. Whats 40% of nothing? % doesn't mean much when the number is so small to begin with. The real world operates in raw numbers. You can only eat so much food, and own so many houses.

I responded to you in another thread about the same thing but here it is, 20 year earnings based on taking another 30/hr off the Captain scale and applying it the the FO scale. That would be a total raise for FO of 50/hr, only did first fours years of FO because if you’re still a NB FO after fours years, year 5 goes up 50/hr already. You really have not thought this through very well, do the work yourself, actually take the scale for both adjust it how you feel it should be and then run the numbers for just an inflationary raise, you will see that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is not what you think it is, it just not!
If you don’t believe my numbers, run them yourself, I did the work for you!


“It’s you that doesn’t get it, I spelled it out like I would to a third grader,
I took 30/hr off the Captain pay, applied it to FO pay, over 12 years you will earn 130,000 less.
At only 2% per year increase @900 hours/yr;
The 12 year Captain pay untouched, in 12 years is 403, 13-411.20, 14-419.43, 15-427.86, 16-436.37, 17-445.09, 18-453.99, 19-463.07, 20-472.33
The 12 year Captain pay your way, in 12 years is 367.29, 13-374.66, 14-382.12, 15-389.77, 16-397.46, 17-405.52, 18-413.62, 19-421.90, 20-430.34
20 years=6,204,922
20 years=5,789,998
Difference of 414,924 over 20 years!
So, YOU would rather have an extra 30/hr over the new rates, take away that 30 from the Captain rate, earn an extra 120k over the first 4 years instead of 415k over 20, you might want to rethink your stance!
The new contract should have been better for the first 4 years, no question but not at the expense of future earnings! After 4 years, if you’re still an FO, the pay goes up between 40 and 50/hr depending on pay group, so no point in jigging with all the numbers, 4 years as FO currently is a reasonable assumption, you will earn far more over your career by not taking from the top to give to the bottom. After the first four years the FO pay seems to be tied to some formula at around 55-60% of Captain pay, could be better there too but the math is the math, higher Captain pay will equate to higher FO pay.
If you still don’t see it, well, what can I say, do the math yourself“

I totally get it. It's you that doesn't get it. I don't care about this fantasy 2% per year number that you made up and applied to this. I understand the math. I believe you that it's right I don't even need to do it myself. 2% compounded at current caprain rates adds up and we "might" get 2% per year so we better keep the captain pay high because 2% on big numbers is bigger than 2% on small numbers. It's just not relevant to my point. Today's money is way more valuable than tomorrow's. When interest rates on debt and money a person could be investing at 5-10% or more today, getting that money today is worth more than waiting for it at 2%. That 2% you talk about compounding in the tables through the years is irrelevant as no one knows what the economic situation will be or if those rates will be readjusted before 12 years from now anyway. If the money a person could invest today at 5-7% is compounded, or debt they could pay off at 7-12%+ it would be worth much more than the rates you talk about compounding at 2%

Nevermind the fact that year 1-4 still doesn't compete with flair.

Again, these upgrades will dry up and some FOs will be there for 10 years+. In that case they could have really used that money in their first 4 years.

I also agree that after the 12 years, the early money has dismissing returns.

This contract benefits the 12 year guys and captains the most and won't benefit too many FOs a whole lot for several years.

I also just found out that they upped the MMG to 84 hours. So while the rates are higher, you also have to work more hours which means the raise isn't as big as it appears on an annual basis and your schedules just got worse.

And yes, using your model and answering your question, I would absolutely prefer to take the 120k in the first 4 years than to take the 400k spread out over 20 years. That's a no brainer. I'm not sure who on earth wouldn't. Then again, let's listen to the guy who declared bankruptcy. Nevermind, it makes sense now.

Or and hear me out, Pilots could tell Ac they are not happy needing two jobs and not take the job! Weird hey, not taking a job that doesn’t pay enough!