Cog in the machine...

Goal 3 : Align compensation with market and business performance, while providing baseline protection.

     Okay... I'll admit that our team's initial proposal was pretty much in line with the Spirit negotiators' claim that "the traditional approach in labor negotiations is that often the parties agree to fixed wage pools without regard to economic circumstance at the time of the adjustment." We started off with an initial proposal for fixed, salary adjustment pools -- identical to that we had during our last contract -- with the idea of continuing to be willing to risk losing out on bigger salary increases in really good years, for protections during the really bad (of which we've had a few during the last contract). But the "market-based" plan Spirit presented to us was worth considering.

     The company's stated "compensation philosophy" is pretty simple and straightforward. Spirit would like its employees to start with a base salary slightly less than the market average for our jobs... 97% of market in our case. But it also includes an incentive bonus plan, where employees would earn slightly above market when Spirit performs to normal business expectations -- and earn significantly above market when we, as a Company, excel. This makes good sense to everyone involved: it protects Spirit during downturns, when our competitors can pay lower wages, and incentivizes and pays us "above average" wages when we do the job we're supposed to do.

     Unfortunately, that stated philosophy was put to lie with Spirit's contract offer and what the company wanted us to accept wouldn't keep us at the "slightly below wages / slightly above bonus" plan they said they wanted.

     The first potential roadblock to accepting this plan was the price we were to pay to get into it: forgoing any "selective salary adjustment" raise pool for this year. I, for one, had little problem understanding the company's intent here: after six years of guaranteed 3.5% raises -- while the economy tanked and our neighbors were getting laid off and unrepresented coworkers were getting nothing for raises -- I could easily believe Spirit's market data that indicated we were, on average, at 101% of market (ignoring, for the moment, the dubious claim that our Technical Designers are at 139%, throwing off that average) and passing on an expected 3.5% raise would drop us down to right around the "97%-of-market" where Spirit said they wanted us to be.

     The roadblock with the lack of a raise wasn't about our average rate, however, it was that we have a significant number of coworkers who, even with the guaranteed pools over the past six years, still remain well below market. (And, to pre-empt any claim about under-performers who don't deserve a raise, several of these below-market coworkers have Performance ratings of "Exceed" or "Exceptional.")

     So while the team was willing to pay for this "slightly below wages / slightly above bonus" plan with this year's raise -- as every other union had in the past -- we needed something to take care of our coworkers who remain well below market and proposed a counter-offer to do just that. Which, along with corrections to the incentive and salary caps we requested, the company proceeded to ignore.

(to be continued)


-- Bill, who'd hope the reasons listed thus far would be enough to convince you to reject the contract…