Mechanics Wages

Magsau,
I thought Fred Ex is credited with cementing the hub and spoke system (pretty influential school paper, eh?). The real hubs are Memphis and Louisville. Maybe we aren't traditional.

UAL777 Flyer,
I realize Fedex/UPS aren't traditional passenger hub and spoke carriers, I thought that was obvious. UAL management continually espouses the benefits of the hub and spoke concept (I'm not talking about pricing). Are we gonna have non-stops from DSM-COS, SLC-ATL, BOI-PDX, MIA-MHT? I don't think so. The concept is the same for pax or boxes. If the market supports direct flights, then fly it and charge accordingly, otherwise hub it.

Besides, I think some are missing the point that management's job is to manage and our jobs are to fly, repair, sell, etc... Should you be paid different to do the same job? I'm not saying an individual carriers specific financial condition doesn't matter, but to assume we do different jobs and should be paid differently is faulty logic, IMHO.
 
Magsua;
So in other words FED Ex pilots get paid less but they have the opportunity to make it up in OT. The point I was trying to make is that UAL777Flyer was implying that Freight pays better because its the business. If that was the case then their pilots should receive an hourly wage that is 20% higher also. The fact is the responsibility is the same when working either a freighter or a passenger aircraft. If anything its greater with a passenger aircraft.
To me the pilots have a scewed pay system. On the one end you have pilots making peanuts while on the other they are making a fortune. Perhaps thats why the one end of the union is sueing the other.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 4:10:25 AM HI-LOCK wrote:

Who do you think was performing the Fed Ex Heavy "C" checks from 1995 until recently on B-727 and A-300 aircraft? A major airline named American Airlines in Tulsa.The same skills have to be utilized repairing a freighter as is used repairing a passenger plane.Some of the structure repairs on a freighter are MORE extensive than on a passenger plane such as a seat track splice on B-727 freighter.EQUAL SKILLS=EQUAL PAY.
----------------
[/blockquote]

EQAUL SKILLS=EQUAL PAY !?! Which fantasy world are you living in? There is pay disparity in every company and there is nothing you can do about it. If it was true I would have stayed with the very first company that hired me. But it's not, so I left for greener pastures, and again and again until I found the job that paid me a salary I really preferred. And guess what? I still look around to see if I can make more money.

This mentality of staying with the same employer or corporation for a life time died many years ago. You no longer gain any better pay or benefits for staying with any company for a long time. The new guys coming in behind you are always going to make a bit more money than you too. But being a union member you are deluded into thinking you have security. Equal skills just keeps you employed.
 
Wow...you mean UPS is starting mechanics at $42 an hour? If that's the case, I'd have my resume over there in a heartbeat. But one thing many are forgetting - After 9/11/01, there are still a lot of folks who are unwilling to board an airliner, but that doesn't stop them from sending a planeload of packages on UPS. Of course, I suppose that UAL could shift more towards package delivery, but that sounds like a freight version of Avolar, IMHO.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
This mentality of staying with the same employer or corporation for a life time died many years ago. You no longer gain any better pay or benefits for staying with any company for a long time. The new guys coming in behind you are always going to make a bit more money than you too. But being a union member you are deluded into thinking you have security. Equal skills just keeps you employed.
----------------
[/blockquote]

trvlr64,

I don't know where you came up with that! Every major airline has a 2 or 3 tier pay scale that takes any where from 5 to 10 years to top out. By the time you reach the top of the pay scale your seniority is getting to the point where it means something. Plus our retirement is also based on years of service. Not including 401K. I'm not sure how they hire or do the pay for non-contract employees at United but for the unionized we usually come out better staying in one place.

I know in other industries like some of the DOT COM's you can negotiate your pay and the retirement is on your shoulders. I know of several of such companies.

What the mechanics of the airline industry need is to organize under one union. Lets say AMFA. All industry wages and retirement are negotiated through that union. And all mechanics vote on the contract industry wide. The pay scales would be apprentice and journeyman. Just like carpenters, plumbers and other skill unions. You take your union seniority and pay with you when you go to another airline. Company seniority would be for bidding and lay-off from that company only.

I know I'm dreaming but wouldn't it nice?
 
Busdrvr,

A little off the subject here but we all know how the IAM represents it's members. They have not proven anything yet. Even the threat of AMFA hasn't got them off their a** to do anything. AMFA is a craft union the represents mechanics. They know the needs of the mechanic. The IAM will represent any group that will pay them dues.

In the system that I described a company would get what they pay for. To get to journeyman you need to prove yourself.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 11:35:30 AM gatemech wrote:

[What the mechanics of the airline industry need is to organize under one union. Lets say AMFA. All industry wages and retirement are negotiated through that union. And all mechanics vote on the contract industry wide. The pay scales would be apprentice and journeyman. Just like carpenters, plumbers and other skill unions. You take your union seniority and pay with you when you go to another airline. Company seniority would be for bidding and lay-off from that company only.

I know I'm dreaming but wouldn't it nice?

----------------
[/blockquote]


Gatemech,
EXTREMELY INSIGHTFUL! A couple of points though. Instead of taking your seniority for pay with you, maybe the pay curve should be flattened. In other words, ruduce the disparity in wages for a relatively junior guy and a very senior guy. Otherwise, what incentive would UAL have to hire an expensive guy with seniority over a cheap guy without lots of union seniority. Could actually make it more diff for the senior guy to get a job. the other point I'd make is why do you have to have one union? why can't the AMFA and the IAM come together to decide what the industry wide wage rate should be? then maybe the IAM and AMFA could do battle on how well the represent your interest instead of which union got the most recent and highest paying contract
 
The ability to dictate price in the marketplace is much easier for all freight carriers than it is for passenger carriers. There is so much overcapacity in the U.S. passenger airline industry that fares have fallen through the floor. And when you have to remain competitive with low fare carriers like Southwest, ATA, JetBlue, Air Tran, etc., your ability to charge accordingly is significantly reduced. And most of those carriers above farm out their heavy overhaul maintenance work. That has a huge affect on what a passenger carrier can afford to pay their workers vs. what a freight carrier can afford to pay theirs. Drawing pay comparisons of UA vs. FedEx/UPS is ludicrous. It is not an equal comparison.
 
Busdrvr;
Your post is good. We should flatten the curve. Seniority has become the company's most potent weapon against us. The ability to move freely from carrier to carrier without the huge financial hit would give workers more leverage at the table. Seniority will always be important for layoff protection,bidding and promotion. A flattened pay scale would make it harder for companies to use bankruptcy to scare their workers into concessions.
 
The B scale payrates came about through the same process as the ESOP and the current concession package that is about to be foisted upon us; that is through threats of massive layoffs, bankruptcy or liquidation. Lowering the pay of new hires may have seemed like a more palatable choice back then but it served to further cement workers into their current positions and allows the company to treat them with far less respect than they would get away with if they were free to jump ship and go to the best offer.

If you take a deeper and longer look at the situation you'll see that this sort of thing isn't confined to just the airline industry. Big corporations by nature have very little concern for the welfare of those hapless souls who do the LABOR (is that a dirty word?). It's all about the bottom line - the profits - and the expedient siphoning off and transfer of those profits to the chosen few.
 
UAL777Flyer,
Since I'm a pilot I'll stick with that field...

Do you think Fedex or Ups will voluntarily pay their pilots more than pax carriers? Of course not, but the union and mgt will always include major pax carriers contracts in their own negotiations because they do the same job (and pilots flee the cargo carriers if it pays below pax pay rates-of course there has to be hiring)!
UPS pilots were below indusrty standard for a long time, even though the Corp was very profitable.

And are you saying that UPS/Fedex don't face low-cost competition? Cargo carriage is a much easier buisness to put together a new, low-cost carrier than pax ops.

Your points regarding pricing and such are specific issues affecting pax carriers right now, but that doesn't mean it should be a general rule that cargo carriers shoul pay more.
 
What the mechanics of the airline industry need is to organize under one union. Lets say AMFA. All industry wages and retirement are negotiated through that union. And all mechanics vote on the contract industry wide. The pay scales would be apprentice and journeyman. Just like carpenters, plumbers and other skill unions. You take your union seniority and pay with you when you go to another airline. Company seniority would be for bidding and lay-off from that company only.

I know I'm dreaming but wouldn't it nice?

----------------
[/blockquote]

Hmm.....are you saying one pay scale for all airlines? How would airlines like Vanguard be able to pay A/A level wages? Or would the wages be decreased to make it more affordable for the smaller airlines?

AMFA represents enough airlines now to test your theory. It would be interesting to see how they could integrate airlines as diverse as ACA, Alaska, and NWA.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 10:32:42 PM will fix for food wrote:


Hmm.....are you saying one pay scale for all airlines? How would airlines like Vanguard be able to pay A/A level wages? Or would the wages be decreased to make it more affordable for the smaller airlines?

AMFA represents enough airlines now to test your theory. It would be interesting to see how they could "integrate" airlines as diverse as ACA, Alaska, and NWA.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Hmm...THAT'S THE POINT! wouldn't those Vanguard employees prob rather work for a larger more financially stabile airline? The point would be to prevent bargain basement corner cutting airlines from ever starting.
 
If your running shoes are not on, you must be sitting on the sidelines.

Meaning - In order to survive you must be willing to change. WHQ
 
[/blockquote]

Hmm...THAT'S THE POINT! wouldn't those Vanguard employees prob rather work for a larger more financially stabile airline? The point would be to prevent "bargain basement" "corner cutting" airlines from ever starting.

----------------
[/blockquote]

I see your point. It would be very difficult, almost imossible, for anyone to start a new airline. HMMM...eliminate the competition before they even start...good idea. Now if we can get the larger airlines to actually BE more financially stabile,we will be in good shape.