Recall of MEC Chair & Vice Chair

[Dry Guy]

I understand that the company pays 80% of it.

Then I don't care. I'll never complain about another labour group getting a raise.

[cdnavater]

LOL. Nope this was overly simplifed deliberately. Two equal pots of money distributed differently. Then just adding up years 1-35 for a sum career total. It is after all just addition. Copy and paste each column into excel. Easy verification.

It depends on how you define 'equal pots'. It doesn't make much sense that you would have to reduce 25 years of salary with 100k to increase 10 years of pay with 100k. It all depends on how many pilots are on each pay scale level. The numbers as posted don't make much sense.

This whole idea is bullshit because ALPA could have just as easily said - the pilots on yrs 1-4 need the increases the most right now, let's get rid of flat pay asap (like we promised we would) and bring starting wages up considerably. Then in 2027 we can apply more increases towards the top of the scale, who are already comfortable.

I haven't looked up the exact numbers but easily a 1/3rd of the pilots on property have less than 5 years of service, and close to 2/3rds have less than 10. Bringing up the bottom now would have benefitted a significant majority of the membership and the rest of the scale could be worked on in subsequent rounds. If that was the trade off it should have been an easy choice. That way juniors would immediately have higher earnings and then would still benefit from the "steep" pay scale theory as they accrued YOS.

ALPA deliberately chose to do the opposite and allow juniors to languish while favoring the smallest portion of the pilot group who already make the most money. Anyone desperately trying to find a way to justify this, likely falls within that minority.

Even if it wasn’t the company that wanted it, let’s say the union wanted to fix the top more than the bottom, we are talking about a group that is as you say comfortable but have been lagging way behind their peers and working under bankruptcy era contracts for 20 years.
You’re suggesting more of the pie went to the juniors in exchange for a smaller piece of the pie for the seniors, seems like you are looking out for yourself, no different than the union reps being disparaged for the same thing.
Let’s think about this rationally, a big raise now at the top end means a 5% raise in a couple years will look fairly decent, 5% of 400 is 20, which if you tell me I’m getting a 20/hr raise I’m probably content.
So, next round more focus should absolutely go to the bottom but I believe fixing the top now was the right time, plus as I said, they have been working far longer under the crappy contract and quite frankly were far more deserving of the bigger increases

[ACPA2.0]

I believe fixing the top now was the right time, plus as I said, they have been working far longer under the crappy contract and quite frankly were far more deserving of the bigger increases

Its always a good time to @#$! the junior pilots. No time like the present.

ACPA 2.0

[cdnavater]

I believe fixing the top now was the right time, plus as I said, they have been working far longer under the crappy contract and quite frankly were far more deserving of the bigger increases

Its always a good time to @#$! the junior pilots. No time like the present.

ACPA 2.0

Always!
I like how junior pilots think f#>king the senior pilots isn’t the exact same thing! The only difference is demographics, eventually the junior pilots will be senior and I guarantee they will vote a bigger raise for themselves, screw the junior pilots and the cycle continues!
Negotiations are quite simple, know your demographics and appease the majority by 1%, easy peasy

[digits_]

I like how junior pilots think f#>king the senior pilots isn’t the exact same thing!

How is junior pilots asking for a salary that's at least one third of that of the senior pilots 'fucking' them over exactly?

I'm not sure that people who find it normal that their colleagues make 20% (72500 vs 347500 based on numbers posted earlier in this thread) of their salary flying for the same company really have that great collective unity feeling that a union should have.

[Torontomaplelaughs]

Because we need to focus on the most gains in the higher tax brackets to make sure we collectively pay more taxes.

More money for junior pilots is less taxes and thus bad.

This is the same for quality of life gains. Government can't tax extra time off so bad...focus needs to be to get those large $$$ gains at the top end. Just makes sense.

[cdnavater]

I like how junior pilots think f#>king the senior pilots isn’t the exact same thing!

How is junior pilots asking for a salary that's at least one third of that of the senior pilots 'fucking' them over exactly?

I'm not sure that people who find it normal that their colleagues make 20% (72500 vs 347500 based on numbers posted earlier in this thread) of their salary flying for the same company really have that great collective unity feeling that a union should have.

So, to make some kind of point, you take the bottom and the top and compare them, who cares who posted it earlier, you posting it is the same false narrative!
It’s not the asking for a higher salary, it’s the FACT that the senior pilots have lost more than ANY junior pilot over the years. They have been working under a bankruptcy era, followed by FOS forced pay and working conditions for 20 years. So, any junior pilots asking for more in place of the senior pilot sacrificing yet again, is literally an attempt at screwing them the same way they claim to be!
Why do pilots keep applying, because they know the pay off down the road is big, however in their shortsightedness, they would rather have it now and not wait like every other pilot who came before them!
The math maths, if you take from the top to “fix” the bottom 1-3 years, you sacrifice long term earnings. As has been pointed out several times, you will spend most of your career on the top scale and a higher actual wage has a compounding effect with every increase, 2% per year of 400 is better than 2% of 300, dispute that fact!

[ACPA2.0]

The bankruptcy contracts locked in permanent concessions… to “save the pension.”

Then double down with a 10-year deal: 2% gains and 4 years of flat pay for thousands of new pilots.

The biggest gains now go to the very folks who were behind permanent concessions...right before they sail off into retirement with their defined benefit pensions.

ACPA 2.0

[digits_]

I like how junior pilots think f#>king the senior pilots isn’t the exact same thing!

How is junior pilots asking for a salary that's at least one third of that of the senior pilots 'fucking' them over exactly?

I'm not sure that people who find it normal that their colleagues make 20% (72500 vs 347500 based on numbers posted earlier in this thread) of their salary flying for the same company really have that great collective unity feeling that a union should have.

So, to make some kind of point, you take the bottom and the top and compare them, who cares who posted it earlier, you posting it is the same false narrative!

Are the numbers wrong? If so, please correct them so we can discuss the actual numbers. That's why I mentioned the source of the numbers I've used.

It’s not the asking for a higher salary, it’s the FACT that the senior pilots have lost more than ANY junior pilot over the years.

How do you define 'lost'? Did money get taken away from them? Did the salaries go down? Did they not go up as much as was promised? They can all be called 'lost', but there's a huge difference between taking an actual paycut or getting a smaller raise than expected.

They have been working under a bankruptcy era, followed by FOS forced pay and working conditions for 20 years. So, any junior pilots asking for more in place of the senior pilot sacrificing yet again, is literally an attempt at screwing them the same way they claim to be!
Why do pilots keep applying, because they know the pay off down the road is big, however in their shortsightedness, they would rather have it now and not wait like every other pilot who came before them!
The math maths, if you take from the top to “fix” the bottom 1-3 years, you sacrifice long term earnings. As has been pointed out several times, you will spend most of your career on the top scale and a higher actual wage has a compounding effect with every increase, 2% per year of 400 is better than 2% of 300, dispute that fact!

If 1-3 goes up by 100k, that's 300k you'll have in your RRSP to start out with. Or a significantly smaller mortgage @ 6% plus. All that adds up.

What has the historicial % been for the [first year pay]/[top scale pay]? What was that value 20 years ago?

[Fanblade]

What has the historicial % been for the [first year pay]/[top scale pay]? What was that value 20 years ago?

2003 (45023)/(296,000) =15.21%

Prior to 2001 the percentage would be slightly lower.

Because you were so surprised by the pay scales on a previous page, you outed yourself. You’re not an AC pilots. In fact you don’t seem to really have an understanding of the industry at all.

[digits_]

What has the historicial % been for the [first year pay]/[top scale pay]? What was that value 20 years ago?

2003 (45023)/(296,000) =15.21%

Prior to 2001 the percentage would be slightly lower.

Because you were so surprised by the pay scales on a previous page, you outed yourself. You’re not an AC pilots. In fact you don’t seem to really have an understanding of the industry at all.

Well ok then. Congrats on the improvements I suppose... Yikes...

[Fanblade]

What has the historicial % been for the [first year pay]/[top scale pay]? What was that value 20 years ago?

2003 (45023)/(296,000) =15.21%

Prior to 2001 the percentage would be slightly lower.

Because you were so surprised by the pay scales on a previous page, you outed yourself. You’re not an AC pilots. In fact you don’t seem to really have an understanding of the industry at all.

Well ok then. Congrats on the improvements I suppose... Yikes...

It wouldn’t be a shock if you understood the industry.

Another give away. Someone familiar with the industry wouldn’t be asking this question. They would know the answer.

How do you define 'lost'? Did money get taken away from them? Did the salaries go down? Did they not go up as much as was promised? They can all be called 'lost', but there's a huge difference between taking an actual paycut or getting a smaller raise than expected.

[thepoors]

The bankruptcy contracts locked in permanent concessions… to “save the pension.”

Then double down with a 10-year deal: 2% gains and 4 years of flat pay for thousands of new pilots.

The biggest gains now go to the very folks who were behind permanent concessions...right before they sail off into retirement with their defined benefit pensions.

ACPA 2.0

This is spot on. "F*ck you, I got mine."

[cdnavater]

How is junior pilots asking for a salary that's at least one third of that of the senior pilots 'fucking' them over exactly?

I'm not sure that people who find it normal that their colleagues make 20% (72500 vs 347500 based on numbers posted earlier in this thread) of their salary flying for the same company really have that great collective unity feeling that a union should have.

So, to make some kind of point, you take the bottom and the top and compare them, who cares who posted it earlier, you posting it is the same false narrative!

Are the numbers wrong? If so, please correct them so we can discuss the actual numbers. That's why I mentioned the source of the numbers I've used.

It’s not the asking for a higher salary, it’s the FACT that the senior pilots have lost more than ANY junior pilot over the years.

How do you define 'lost'? Did money get taken away from them? Did the salaries go down? Did they not go up as much as was promised? They can all be called 'lost', but there's a huge difference between taking an actual paycut or getting a smaller raise than expected.

They have been working under a bankruptcy era, followed by FOS forced pay and working conditions for 20 years. So, any junior pilots asking for more in place of the senior pilot sacrificing yet again, is literally an attempt at screwing them the same way they claim to be!
Why do pilots keep applying, because they know the pay off down the road is big, however in their shortsightedness, they would rather have it now and not wait like every other pilot who came before them!
The math maths, if you take from the top to “fix” the bottom 1-3 years, you sacrifice long term earnings. As has been pointed out several times, you will spend most of your career on the top scale and a higher actual wage has a compounding effect with every increase, 2% per year of 400 is better than 2% of 300, dispute that fact!

If 1-3 goes up by 100k, that's 300k you'll have in your RRSP to start out with. Or a significantly smaller mortgage @ 6% plus. All that adds up.

What has the historicial % been for the [first year pay]/[top scale pay]? What was that value 20 years ago?

Ok, your alias implies you are good with numbers, here are some numbers because I am tired of this ridiculous notion that more for three years is better than more for 25 years, it’s absurd!
My parameters are a simple method for ease, your utopia vs actual numbers. The FO YR 1 was 2/3 of yr 1 Capt but because of compounding the 2%, by year 13 Capt it’s around 60%. Based on 900 hours per year and going up 2% per year, spending the first 12 years as 777 FO and the 13-30 as 777 Captain. There is no NAV or overseas pay, just the posted hourly from the executive summary tables.
First Utopia:
FO pay 2/3 of Captain year 1 180,000, 2% per year to year 12 223,807= 2,414,173
Capt year 13 378,949 2% per year to year 30 530,620=8,114,172
Grand total=10,528,345 career wages
Current pay grid and again no NAV or overseas pay
Year 1 FO 81,882(2025) increasing 2% per year to year 12 334,044=2,708,217
Year 13 Capt 413,325 increasing 2% per year to year 30 578,754=8,850,211
Grand total 11,558,428
A difference of 1,030,083
With AC there are far too many variables to paint a truly accurate picture but you would have to invest about 1000 in after tax money per month with 6% rate of return for 30 years to get the same result, keep in mind the AC pensions eat up all of your RRSP room, so no tax break.
Now, all of this said, you are talking about shifting a significant amount of money away from the pilots who are already on top scale, who have been far more affected by the past 20 years and were counting on higher career earnings in their later career.
So, here we are, a new hire today starting as 777 FO will make a million more over their career and we don’t have to sacrifice the senior pilots wages to pay new hires almost 200k, nobody does that!
How would you vote?

[digits_]

Grand total 11,558,428
A difference of 1,030,083
With AC there are far too many variables to paint a truly accurate picture but you would have to invest about 1000 in after tax money per month with 6% rate of return for 30 years to get the same result, keep in mind the AC pensions eat up all of your RRSP room, so no tax break.
Now, all of this said, you are talking about shifting a significant amount of money away from the pilots who are already on top scale, who have been far more affected by the past 20 years and were counting on higher career earnings in their later career.
So, here we are, a new hire today starting as 777 FO will make a million more over their career and we don’t have to sacrifice the senior pilots wages to pay new hires almost 200k, nobody does that!
How would you vote?

You're making the assumption that people will make that in 35 years. You also claim the senior pilots deserve the bigger salary because they got screwed over in the past. Those are 2 conflicting positions. In the first one you trust the company to be around for 35 years without pulling some shady stuff, in the second one you show the company can't be trusted.

With the difference over 35 years being 1 million dollars, or about 10% based on 35 years of total earnings, then I would absolutely pick the 'utopia' pay scale. Would senior folks vote for that? Probably not. New hires? I'd say a fair bit of them *also* have been screwed around by a plethora of companies, and know that you can't really plan past the current contract, if at all. A 10% career discount for a high(er) salary to start out with. Yes please!

Note that a lot of AC pilots won't have a 35 year career either. Further skewing the curve and making the utopia scenario much more appealing for older people starting out.

[cdnavater]

Grand total 11,558,428
A difference of 1,030,083
With AC there are far too many variables to paint a truly accurate picture but you would have to invest about 1000 in after tax money per month with 6% rate of return for 30 years to get the same result, keep in mind the AC pensions eat up all of your RRSP room, so no tax break.
Now, all of this said, you are talking about shifting a significant amount of money away from the pilots who are already on top scale, who have been far more affected by the past 20 years and were counting on higher career earnings in their later career.
So, here we are, a new hire today starting as 777 FO will make a million more over their career and we don’t have to sacrifice the senior pilots wages to pay new hires almost 200k, nobody does that!
How would you vote?

You're making the assumption that people will make that in 35 years. You also claim the senior pilots deserve the bigger salary because they got screwed over in the past. Those are 2 conflicting positions. In the first one you trust the company to be around for 35 years without pulling some shady stuff, in the second one you show the company can't be trusted.

With the difference over 35 years being 1 million dollars, or about 10% based on 35 years of total earnings, then I would absolutely pick the 'utopia' pay scale. Would senior folks vote for that? Probably not. New hires? I'd say a fair bit of them *also* have been screwed around by a plethora of companies, and know that you can't really plan past the current contract, if at all. A 10% career discount for a high(er) salary to start out with. Yes please!

Note that a lot of AC pilots won't have a 35 year career either. Further skewing the curve and making the utopia scenario much more appealing for older people starting out.

Not conflicting, just based on current environment, is another round of bankruptcy possible, sure of course it is, also it was a 30 year career assumption not 35.
However, the bankruptcy would affect all the pilots including the junior pilots, so the numbers should remain relatively stable relative to each other.
I’ve been on the receiving end of being screwed by previous and my current employers employer, the same company we are discussing but I still don’t go through life thinking it could all end, what a terrible way to live! When I view future earnings, I see them going up and look forward to spending it, keeping others employed by my spending habits.
I want to be clear, there was a big fat zero % chance that a neutral wage at 12 years and a 120k raise to 180k at year one would of passed, that’s what your utopia would have been, so really it’s a non starter.
You are also neglecting the fact that the extra million in earnings is pensionable!
I would support a separate pay scale for old and new, anyone on top scale continues and a vote for the pilots year 12 and under for this new way of thinking, to share the pie more for new pilots. I suspect that would fail too!

[Fanblade]

Digits,

Can you confirm for me.

You spent about a decade working 703/705. You never worked for any bigger airline in this country.

You left the industry entirely a few years back.

You have a prolific posting history.

So what is your angle? You seem extremely motivated on this subject yet it doesn't look like it impacts you one way or the other.

You have demonstrated poor understanding of how pay has worked at the major airlines in Canada for decades. Not saying it's right.

Do you just like arguing? Trying to get back in the industry but hate the starting wage?

What is your motivation?

[ACPA2.0]

Digits,

Can you confirm for me.

You spent about a decade working 703/705. You never worked for any bigger airline in this country.

You left the industry entirely a few years back.

You have a prolific posting history.

So what is your angle? You seem extremely motivated on this subject yet it doesn't look like it impacts you one way or the other.

You have demonstrated poor understanding of how pay has worked at the major airlines in Canada for decades. Not saying it's right.

Do you just like arguing? Trying to get back in the industry but hate the starting wage?

What is your motivation?

You fcking get'em FanBlade.

Those outsiders need to be taught a thing or two on how things work around here. New pilots and junior pilots need to eat shit.

ACPA 2.0

[digits_]

So what is your angle? You seem extremely motivated on this subject yet it doesn't look like it impacts you one way or the other.

I might want to apply at some point, so the current and future pay conditions at airlines do interest me.

For my angle, I mainly hope to drive the point home that a 20% pay difference between the bottom and the top is not normal and should not just be accepted. That a lot of the arguments supporting this are extremely weak and serve no other purpose than to try and justify decisions that the majority of the population would find completely unacceptable. Especially in a unionized environment.

It's easy to get caught up in the story once you're 'in'. 30 years is a long time. A lot can and will change.

You have demonstrated poor understanding of how pay has worked at the major airlines in Canada for decades.

I understand the current pay system quite well. I am fuzzy on the situation 15+ years ago. I don't find it very relevant, but because people brought it up as an argument to justify the current pay scale, I was curious about the details.

What is your motivation?

If a union asks for public support and you defend them when friends and family ask 'are things really that bad?'. And then you end up with a situation where a senior pilot's raise is roughly the same as a junior pilot's salary, that needs to be pointed out and addressed. That's just plain wrong. When I then read posts trying to justify this as somehow a good thing, even for junior pilots, then that irks me. Especially if I find the arguments to be incomplete or incorrect.

[cdnavater]

So what is your angle? You seem extremely motivated on this subject yet it doesn't look like it impacts you one way or the other.

I might want to apply at some point, so the current and future pay conditions at airlines do interest me.

For my angle, I mainly hope to drive the point home that a 20% pay difference between the bottom and the top is not normal and should not just be accepted. That a lot of the arguments supporting this are extremely weak and serve no other purpose than to try and justify decisions that the majority of the population would find completely unacceptable. Especially in a unionized environment.
Not normal where, what industry? This is completely normal in aviation
It's easy to get caught up in the story once you're 'in'. 30 years is a long time. A lot can and will change.

You have demonstrated poor understanding of how pay has worked at the major airlines in Canada for decades.

I understand the current pay system quite well. I am fuzzy on the situation 15+ years ago. I don't find it very relevant, but because people brought it up as an argument to justify the current pay scale, I was curious about the details.

What is your motivation?

If a union asks for public support and you defend them when friends and family ask 'are things really that bad?'. And then you end up with a situation where a senior pilot's raise is roughly the same as a junior pilot's salary, that needs to be pointed out and addressed. That's just plain wrong. When I then read posts trying to justify this as somehow a good thing, even for junior pilots, then that irks me. Especially if I find the arguments to be incomplete or incorrect.
why, are you the salary police! You find the arguments wrong. Why, tell me why a pilot with 20 plus years working for a company, who has fallen behind his peers in the US significantly shouldn’t get a big raise over the junior pilot? You haven’t presented a single argument on why they shouldn’t, just that you think it’s wrong!

[Fanblade]

I might want to apply at some point, so the current and future pay conditions at airlines do interest me.

For my angle, I mainly hope to drive the point home that a 20% pay difference between the bottom and the top is not normal and should not just be accepted. .

Digits,

I appreciate your honesty.

It's been this way for 70 years and I have my doubts it will ever change. Here is why.

The steep scale dramatically ncreases career income and pension AND (this is huge) once 99% of new pilots get past year 4? They no longer care. Their pain is over and the payoff is beginning.

As someone who supports increased new hire pay I can tell you it is exceedingly difficult to get support, except from those in year 1-4. The last contract had by far the largest aamount of pilots in this demographic and it still didn't happen.

Since this is now multi generational I have my doubts it will ever be addressed to the level you want. Even this generation, if they are like the previous, won't care in a few years.

So if you want to make the jump? You only live once.

[thepoors]

As someone who supports increased new hire pay I can tell you it is exceedingly difficult to get support, except from those in year 1-4. The last contract had by far the largest aamount of pilots in this demographic and it still didn't happen.

Why it didn't happen is a good question. It's not like we can vote for how the pay scale is structured or how that is determined. Maybe if ALPA released the survey results we could see the reality of what different demographics of the pilot group actually wanted - and if they followed those results...

[Hysteria]

Numbers only…. Even if you ask for delta wages in CAD, year 1 of 125.50 cad = only 90 usd.

Hope you all get some QOL and legacy gains.

[Dry Guy]

Goddamn we're underpaid.

[digits_]

why, are you the salary police! You find the arguments wrong. Why, tell me why a pilot with 20 plus years working for a company, who has fallen behind his peers in the US significantly shouldn’t get a big raise over the junior pilot? You haven’t presented a single argument on why they shouldn’t, just that you think it’s wrong!

Well here's the plot twist: the junior pilots are *also* underpaid. But hey, maybe we can get them all on minimum wage and get the top another 2% raise. After all, it will benefit everyone after a 30 year career. Win win win all around.

If you think you're deserving of a raise that exceeds your copilot's total salary, or if you think you truly are worth 5 times more than your colleague to the right, then nothing I say will ever convince you.