LXJET 70+ seat rates out

[JustaNumber]

The way they've structured the "common variant compensation," it is nothing more than a B scale for wages. Think about it--a large number of guys will end up flying 90-seat aircraft for 50-seat wages, and every new hire will end up flying the largest RJs for much less than the majority of pilots on the property. THIS IS A B-SCALE!!! ALPA pilots fought major battles (like the United strike of 1985) to avoid this, and xjet somehow now has this?!? Management needs to know that THIS WILL NOT FLY.

 

[ASApuppy]

There will also be guys making 90 seat pay to fly the 50. Consider it a pay raise to make "Senior Capt". For every pilot on the 70 that gets a pay cut their will be a senior pilot on the 50 getting a pay raise.

 

[rjacobs]

We(LXJT) will NEVER fly a common variant under this arbitrated award IMO. The only one that is out there currently is the CRJ2/7/9 and I highly doubt that the LXJT side will EVER see those airplanes on our property, especially the CRJ2.

What "common variant" does the ERJ135/140/145 have that is over 50 seats? none. So common variant doesnt apply.

If we get CRJ7/9's and we have NO CRJ2's than common variant doesnt apply.

The EMB 170/175/190 has no common variant under 50 seats, so again the common variant clause doesnt apply.

I just dont see management shifting old ass CRJ2's over to the legacy XJT operation because it does them no good financially since our total 50 seat compensation is much greater than the LASA 50 seat compensation.

 

[rjacobs]

There will also be guys making 90 seat pay to fly the 50. Consider it a pay raise to make "Senior Capt". For every pilot on the 70 that gets a pay cut their will be a senior pilot on the 50 getting a pay raise.

Like I just posted, if we have no equipment on property that hits the "common variant" clause, which I doubt we will ever see, than this clause is basically null and void and will never be in effect.

If we get 170/175/190 common variant doesnt apply and those guys will ALL make the extra $2.

If we get 700/900 and have NO 200 on property(which I dont see management shifting to us anyway and I dont think they can) than common variant doesnt apply and all 700/900 guys get the $2.

I just dont see a situation where there will be guys flying the EMB145 and getting the 51+ seat pay while there are guys on the 51+ stuff getting paid 50 seat pay since the EMB145 has NO common variant above 50 seats and I just dont see management shifting CRJ200's over to us.

I still think ALL new flying that is in the CRJ will be going to the LASA side and the only new flying that will possibly come to the LXJT side would be EMB170/175/190 flying.

 

[JustaNumber]

We(LXJT) will NEVER fly a common variant under this arbitrated award IMO. The only one that is out there currently is the CRJ2/7/9 and I highly doubt that the LXJT side will EVER see those airplanes on our property, especially the CRJ2.

Are you forgetting that "your property" is in the middle of a merger?

What you are missing is the concept of precedent. Let's say the merger of LXJT and LASA goes to an arbitrator. He looks at the most recent contract involving common variants, and figures that's now industry standard. Wa-la...you're now flying a 90-seat RJ for 50-seat wages.

Or let's say they pull a MAIR, and cook the books enough to funnel all profits to Inc. and declare that XJET is bankrupt. Again, a judge now looks at precedent, and declares that the company needs this to regain profitability.

I hate the concept of precedent, but unfortunately it is a huge deal in the airline contract game. So it's foolish to be shortsighted about setting new precedents, saying it could never really apply to us. Ask yourself, why would they want it if it doesn't apply?!?

 

[Nevets]

Are you forgetting that "your property" is in the middle of a merger?

What you are missing is the concept of precedent. Let's say the merger of LXJT and LASA goes to an arbitrator. He looks at the most recent contract involving common variants, and figures that's now industry standard. Wa-la...you're now flying a 90-seat RJ for 50-seat wages.

Or let's say they pull a MAIR, and cook the books enough to funnel all profits to Inc. and declare that XJET is bankrupt. Again, a judge now looks at precedent, and declares that the company needs this to regain profitability.

I hate the concept of precedent, but unfortunately it is a huge deal in the airline contract game. So it's foolish to be shortsighted about setting new precedents, saying it could never really apply to us. Ask yourself, why would they want it if it doesn't apply?!?

There can be no arbitrator for the joint contract. But your concept of precedence is probably why that language is in the new aircraft arbitration. As for bankruptcy, I don't know. Seems like they can now bid competitively for these new aircraft after this arbitration ruling and make a little money.

 

[duc driver]

Or let's say they pull a MAIR, and cook the books enough to funnel all profits to Inc. and declare that XJET is bankrupt. Again, a judge now looks at precedent, and declares that the company needs this to regain profitability.

I don't think this can happen based on how Inc is set up.

 

[rjacobs]

Are you forgetting that "your property" is in the middle of a merger?

What you are missing is the concept of precedent. Let's say the merger of LXJT and LASA goes to an arbitrator. He looks at the most recent contract involving common variants, and figures that's now industry standard. Wa-la...you're now flying a 90-seat RJ for 50-seat wages.

Or let's say they pull a MAIR, and cook the books enough to funnel all profits to Inc. and declare that XJET is bankrupt. Again, a judge now looks at precedent, and declares that the company needs this to regain profitability.

I hate the concept of precedent, but unfortunately it is a huge deal in the airline contract game. So it's foolish to be shortsighted about setting new precedents, saying it could never really apply to us. Ask yourself, why would they want it if it doesn't apply?!?

What the hope is that once(I guess I should say IF) we get a JCBA that this language will be cleaned up and gone. Our JCBA can NOT go to an arbitrator. And Inc. doesnt differentiate between profits(or loss's) on their 10k's from XJT or SKW, its all one big pot.

I dont know who requested this or if it was requested at all and the arbitrator simply did it. This arbitration was an "industry average" arbitration. I think Eagle is doing this percentage thing, I dont know if anybody else is. Is Mesa? Is Pinnacle? Does Republic?

 

[Whydoitry]

I think Eagle's is different in that they have pay based on seniority despite equipment, same as UPS. Saves the company training costs and pilots don't have to chase bigger airframes to make more money, good for everyone. This arbitration is, as stated above, for similar types.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

I can't wait for my 'Senior Pilot' $2.00 pay rise. Just like UPS, is that right?