Cost neutral for employees, but not Management!

[hulagirl]

I think it is great that Dougie is giving everyone a raise this fall. Now we know with certainty that the company can afford to increase our pay, as opposed to the song and dance that we have heard in the past that they just "can't afford it." The whole world sees that indeed, US Airways can afford to raise the pay of contractual employees.
Let's face it, fuel prices are still climbing, USAirways is not making any great strides in customer service standings, and the teeth of management are gleaming with pride. Great!
I feel a good ole fashioned ho-down comin'

 

[rjh]

I think it is great that Dougie is giving everyone a raise this fall. Now we know with certainty that the company can afford to increase our pay, as opposed to the song and dance that we have heard in the past that they just "can't afford it." The whole world sees that indeed, US Airways can afford to raise the pay of contractual employees.

Those in the unions are getting a raise, from year 1 to year 2, etc ..sure, they probably "top out" after a certain number of years, but that's what's in the contract, right?? Those without contracts never have a guarantee of getting a raise from year to year, those with contracts do.

And no, I'm not a member of management.

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

Hooray now I have a good question to ask Mr Parker at the next meeting. "Why the hell is everyone at corporate getting a 3% raise while those of us out there making US profitable, who qualify for food stamps, must have a cost neutral contract?"

Now that's a good idea.

When the Kool-Aid Road Show comes to town, it tends to be a bit disorganized when it comes to speakers. I think the employees that go up to the microphone and ask questions and make statements show excellent initiative and integrity, even if they aren't the best public speakers or become long-winded or hard to follow with their logic. They do want answers, and even if they don't get straight answers the audience can observe Darth and the Imperial lackeys shifting uncomfortably while the quick thinking and fast talking commences.

Now is the time to come up with questions to ask Doogie. It needs to be done before he gets to your station, and it's important that you (whether as an individual or a group) KEEP THE QUESTIONS OFF PUBLIC FORUMS. Never tip your hand before you play. If they have advance notice, the spin will begin before you get to the microphone.

Now, it seems antithetic to avoid discussing questions you might ask on a public board. I'm not saying don't come up with ideas, but don't post them where the Sith can see them. The use of the PM feature with others you can trust not to spill the beans comes in handy here.

Keeping the questions short and to the point is very important. Designating a speaker could come in handy, although you should not abrogate your right to speak if you so choose. Don't expect that you know the answer or you expect a certain answer already, because the point is to make them answer the questions.

These are only suggestions. If done properly, everyone will get to observe what Tempe really thinks (or doesn't) about the issues facing US. The only counter to this method is to do away with Town Hall meetings. That solution would only reinforce the idea that managment isn't willing to sit in the hot seat when confronted by employee groups in public. I wonder how the Court of Public Opinion would rule if that were the case?

I'll wait and see if anyone takes me to task for my suggestions.

 

[PITbull]

Prince,

I happen to think that everything you post is nothing short of brilliance.

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

Prince,

I happen to think that everything you post is nothing short of brilliance.

Pitbull, thank you! But I think brilliance might be overstating it. I find you and BoeingBoy far more erudite and brilliant than myself. Lest anyone be offended, there are others of you on the boards who have great insight into the airline industry, and I appreciate what I learn from you all.

And just so no one gets cute, we'll call it a mutual admiration society, as opposed to a cult of personality (read into that what you like, Kool-aid drinkers).

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

Prince,

your strategy is sound, actually very sound. Another thing to consider is posting a bunch of sofball questions designed to lull them into a false sense of security.

I'm not sure Parker is the enemy but your strategy will smoke him out.

I'd really like to see you get Kirby on the hot seat.

Now, you see, people? I told you there was brilliance that outshines my own. Bob brings up a great idea.

Scott Kirby, poster boy for the Six Minute Video (whether he wants to be or not), is the perfect victim for the Prince's Question Campaign.

As a quick aside, I really need to start trademarking this stuff. Not just because I don't want anyone else using it for free, but it all just sounds so cool.

Okay, back to the post. Class, can anyone tell me what question would really light Scotty Boy's pants on fire if he was asked? I'm going to make this an exception to my "no public forum use" rule, because you never see this guy anywhere near a Town Hall unless it's by accident.

Any takers? Bueller? Bueller?

 

[Barbell]

Now we all know that everyone up top continues to reward themselves for what they think is such a great job, while we at the bottom again get to continue to suffer with sub-standard contract language and no relief in sight.

Now you tell me how that is fair!

Just to show you how much they think of us, look for yourself at what we on the ramp are in the middle of right now.

What a joke!

http://www.iam141.org/usairway.htm#usa.8.4.06

I really am sorry that I haven't had the chance to look at this until now; I just really wanted to make sure that I gave it as thorough a reading as I could.

So this is what it boils down to. From what I've discerned from reading this board, almost every East work group working under the contracts we're discussing here are topped out. Per this contract, that means you'd be making $17.00/hour this year, and $17.35 as of January, which works out to be a 2% raise. Not great by any means, but certainly in the neighborhood of the 3% average we're discussing here, as well. The thing you have to keep in mind is that some people will get nothing, some will get 1%, some 2%, and so on, so long as the department only sees a 3% increase overall. The raise is based on performance, and if you don't perform, you don't get a raise. It looks to me, Jimmy, as if you'll get your raise just for hanging on for one more year.

Now, take that $17.00/hour one is making now. Most Sandcastle employees work an average of 50 hours/week. So that we can compare apples to apples, that would put this rate at about $45,050/year gross. It does not take into account that 10 of those hours would be at an overtime rate.

Now, take a Grade 24 CHQ employee. By my best guestimate, the average employee is at about this pay grade. The vast majority of these employees have worked up from within the company, so they have zero negotiating power and start at just south of $28,000/year. That works out to about $13.21/hour. Over the past 10 years, since we're using the IAM topout here, we'll say that employee earned 3% every year, except for 2 years there was an increase freeze (true story).

So now, 10 years later, the employee under the contract you've posted is making roughly $45,050+ at $17.00/hour on a 50-hour workweek. The Grade 24 employee is now making ~$35,469 gross, working 50 hour weeks, and on a 40-hour workweek that works out to about $16.73/hour.

So, come 1/1/07, assume that employee gets the 3% raise. They'll be making $17.23/hour. The IAM employee will be making $17.35/hour, plus overtime. Insurance costs go up for everyone, every year.

So, tell me again, how is that fair?

 

[Zarah]

I think we should Pay PitBull to ask the questions! =)~

 

[PITbull]

I really am sorry that I haven't had the chance to look at this until now; I just really wanted to make sure that I gave it as thorough a reading as I could.

So this is what it boils down to. From what I've discerned from reading this board, almost every East work group working under the contracts we're discussing here are topped out. Per this contract, that means you'd be making $17.00/hour this year, and $17.35 as of January, which works out to be a 2% raise. Not great by any means, but certainly in the neighborhood of the 3% average we're discussing here, as well. The thing you have to keep in mind is that some people will get nothing, some will get 1%, some 2%, and so on, so long as the department only sees a 3% increase overall. The raise is based on performance, and if you don't perform, you don't get a raise. It looks to me, Jimmy, as if you'll get your raise just for hanging on for one more year.

Now, take that $17.00/hour one is making now. Most Sandcastle employees work an average of 50 hours/week. So that we can compare apples to apples, that would put this rate at about $45,050/year gross. It does not take into account that 10 of those hours would be at an overtime rate.

Now, take a Grade 24 CHQ employee. By my best guestimate, the average employee is at about this pay grade. The vast majority of these employees have worked up from within the company, so they have zero negotiating power and start at just south of $28,000/year. That works out to about $13.21/hour. Over the past 10 years, since we're using the IAM topout here, we'll say that employee earned 3% every year, except for 2 years there was an increase freeze (true story).

So now, 10 years later, the employee under the contract you've posted is making roughly $45,050+ at $17.00/hour on a 50-hour workweek. The Grade 24 employee is now making ~$35,469 gross, working 50 hour weeks, and on a 40-hour workweek that works out to about $16.73/hour.

So, come 1/1/07, assume that employee gets the 3% raise. They'll be making $17.23/hour. The IAM employee will be making $17.35/hour, plus overtime. Insurance costs go up for everyone, every year.

So, tell me again, how is that fair?

Tell me how its fair or reasonable that 10 months out of BK the senior execs receive $2-$4 million for stock they never bought?

The rise in the stock value correlates DIRECTLY with the $2.5 billion concessions (not even including the couple billion added for the dumping of the pensions) given by labor East, and West, (who are still trying to neg. their amendable agreements for the past two years for all groups)?

Tell me how fair it is that the Execs (who have to report their salaries and compensation to the SEC receive anywhere from 10-15% (Crellin 15%)again, less than 1 year out of BK...all the while Dougie and company stating its imparitive for "cost neutral" contracts?

I remember Jerry saying at the table (2004) that when and if the company turns around, labor can always come back to the company and ask to revisit wages...

WELL, THEY ARE!!

 

[Barbell]

Tell me how its fair or reasonable that 10 months out of BK the senior execs receive $2-$4 million for stock they never bought?

It's not.

Part of the OP on this thread pertained to the 3% merit increase for noncontract employees, and I responded to the concern on that part. My post clearly outlines that a 10 year office employee still does not make what an IAM employee makes after BK paycuts, and that's with the 3% raise. I'm not saying the paycuts were right or wrong, but when we hear over and over how represented employees were robbed, even after those cuts they are still making more than an employee with equal seniority in a nonrepresented group.

We're mostly on the same page here. I just disagree that a Quarter of profits means payraises for everybody back to pre-BK levels, senior management or represented. From where I sit, you're both in the same boat on this one. :down:

 

[PITbull]

It's not.

Part of the OP on this thread pertained to the 3% merit increase for noncontract employees, and I responded to the concern on that part. My post clearly outlines that a 10 year office employee still does not make what an IAM employee makes after BK paycuts, and that's with the 3% raise. I'm not saying the paycuts were right or wrong, but when we hear over and over how represented employees were robbed, even after those cuts they are still making more than an employee with equal seniority in a nonrepresented group.

We're mostly on the same page here. I just disagree that a Quarter of profits means payraises for everybody back to pre-BK levels, senior management or represented. From where I sit, you're both in the same boat on this one. :down:

You can't be thinking that administrative (non-labor) employees should receive the same hourly rate as a mechanic?

I do believe that if the company is providing percentage increases it should be for everyone in the company specifically when labor contracts do not provide for contract raises for most of labor who are topped out.

I don't think you should compare hourly rates of pay with licensed mechanics as your example. Someone behind a desk performing administrative work is important work to the company, however a mechanics skill directly relates to customer and crew safety. The hourly rate is not the issue to debate, but rather more in terms of equal %.

 

[Barbell]

You can't be thinking that administrative (non-labor) employees should receive the same hourly rate as a mechanic?

Not necessarily. It was just to show the point that administrative employees are not as highly paid as everybody seems to think. We have the best mechanics in the industry, and I have never questioned the airworthiness of any of our aircraft knowing these men and women are on the watch. I personally think it's a damn shame they don't make more.

I do believe that if the company is providing percentage increases it should be for everyone in the company specifically when labor contracts do not provide for contract raises for most of labor who are topped out.

I would tend agree. However the administrative employee works at will, and the contract employees negotiated these top out rates to balance out something else. I'm not saying "It's the contract you voted for", but there has to be some level of personal responsibility for the state of the top out scale.

I don't think you should compare hourly rates of pay with liscensed mechanics as your example. Someone behind a desk performing administrative work is important work to the company, however a mechanics skill directly relates to customer and crew safety. The hourly rate is not the issue to debate, but rather more in terms of equal %.

And on this we are in 100% agreement.

 

[PITbull]

Not necessarily. It was just to show the point that administrative employees are not as highly paid as everybody seems to think. We have the best mechanics in the industry, and I have never questioned the airworthiness of any of our aircraft knowing these men and women are on the watch. I personally think it's a damn shame they don't make more.
I would tend agree. However the administrative employee works at will, and the contract employees negotiated these top out rates to balance out something else. I'm not saying "It's the contract you voted for", but there has to be some level of personal responsibility for the state of the top out scale.
And on this we are in 100% agreement.

Ok. That was easy.

 

[Barbell]

Ok. That was easy.

Just because I sit in a cube all day doesn't mean I'm unreasonable! B)

 

[BoeingBoy]

I'm not saying "It's the contract you voted for", but there has to be some level of personal responsibility for the state of the top out scale.

So I assume that you would have no problem with the contract employees using any legal means to increase those contractual pay rates (or improve other non-pay provisions)....

Jim