Raise pilot pay- an easy solution?
03-01-2015, 02:43 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2013
Posts: 324
Originally Posted by MaxQ
Some thoughts, some perhaps even with some validity.
One of the areas that I believe "we" (meaning us hourly wage worker bees of the flying business) are getting wrong is the idea of eliminating a segment of the industry rather than get it back to where it was.
Regional airlines didn't used to be considered a deadend job and viewed with disdain by their peers. Regional airlines used to be named North Central, Allegheny, Ozark, Southern,Frontier etc. These were career jobs that paid well, and any pilot employed by them was viewed with respect by his peers. At the time of deregulation they were flying 50 seat Convairs and F-27's and 80+ to 100+ seat DC-9's and maybe some BAC-111's. The commuters were flying B-99's and Metros and Nord 262's and Shorts 330's etc. (some navajos..even a twin beech or two). With deregulation the regionals decided to expand and become trunk airlines. Many commuters filled the void vacated by the regionals.
1. The DOT/FAA in the new era of being regulatory friendly to large corporations, (doing their bidding as opposed to protecting the public good), decides to allow an airline to be marketed as a different entity than what they were. Welcome "American Eagle".."United Express"... "Delta Connection"...whomever. This was a huge philosophical shift from mere code sharing. While not part of the airline deregulation act, it was part and parcel of the tetonic revolution that was just starting in the United States and quickly spread to other industrialized democracies.Every working person has felt the profound effects of this seachange in how workers are viewed..(even by fellow workers).. and compensated.
What do we have now: the Commuters are now the Regionals. The markets served by the Commuters often just lost service.
The Commuters, doing the work of the former regionals(and assuming thier moniker)pay less when adjusted for inflation that the commuters of old.
Our problem isn't that there are regionals. Our problem is that they don't begin to pay, or command the respect, that a regional airline of pre deregulation did.
Rather than trying to fit a saddle upon a cow (in the manner of having the majors add even more aircraft types/complexities/etc to their certificates), perhaps our efforts should be in making the present day regionals the quality workplace that a regional once was.
One of the areas that I believe "we" (meaning us hourly wage worker bees of the flying business) are getting wrong is the idea of eliminating a segment of the industry rather than get it back to where it was.
Regional airlines didn't used to be considered a deadend job and viewed with disdain by their peers. Regional airlines used to be named North Central, Allegheny, Ozark, Southern,Frontier etc. These were career jobs that paid well, and any pilot employed by them was viewed with respect by his peers. At the time of deregulation they were flying 50 seat Convairs and F-27's and 80+ to 100+ seat DC-9's and maybe some BAC-111's. The commuters were flying B-99's and Metros and Nord 262's and Shorts 330's etc. (some navajos..even a twin beech or two). With deregulation the regionals decided to expand and become trunk airlines. Many commuters filled the void vacated by the regionals.
1. The DOT/FAA in the new era of being regulatory friendly to large corporations, (doing their bidding as opposed to protecting the public good), decides to allow an airline to be marketed as a different entity than what they were. Welcome "American Eagle".."United Express"... "Delta Connection"...whomever. This was a huge philosophical shift from mere code sharing. While not part of the airline deregulation act, it was part and parcel of the tetonic revolution that was just starting in the United States and quickly spread to other industrialized democracies.Every working person has felt the profound effects of this seachange in how workers are viewed..(even by fellow workers).. and compensated.
What do we have now: the Commuters are now the Regionals. The markets served by the Commuters often just lost service.
The Commuters, doing the work of the former regionals(and assuming thier moniker)pay less when adjusted for inflation that the commuters of old.
Our problem isn't that there are regionals. Our problem is that they don't begin to pay, or command the respect, that a regional airline of pre deregulation did.
Rather than trying to fit a saddle upon a cow (in the manner of having the majors add even more aircraft types/complexities/etc to their certificates), perhaps our efforts should be in making the present day regionals the quality workplace that a regional once was.
03-01-2015, 03:07 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 741
Originally Posted by NineGturn
If that were to happen the free market would come into play and people would jump ship to the next regional at equal or better pay and their original airline's training costs would skyrocket.
I think it's difficult for pilots to grasp this concept because they are so used to being controlled they don't understand what real freedom would be like. Basically it would mean you wouldn't have to put up with that crap like you do now.
The bottom line is that if you suddenly had control over your own destiny, the airlines would have to compete for your services against each other, something they don't have to do now. If they didn't compete, no one would work there.
I think it's difficult for pilots to grasp this concept because they are so used to being controlled they don't understand what real freedom would be like. Basically it would mean you wouldn't have to put up with that crap like you do now.
The bottom line is that if you suddenly had control over your own destiny, the airlines would have to compete for your services against each other, something they don't have to do now. If they didn't compete, no one would work there.
Some additional thoughts.
Whatever you will fly some airplane for, I will do it for less. And Joe will do it for less than I will. And Bob will do it for less than Joe. Etc.
The ONLY reason that airline pilots are paid what they are is from decades of collective orginization that provided a buffer between what they were paid, how they were treated etc, and what the laws of supply and demand would have paid them.
When deregulation came we found out what the free market paid for a 727 pilot. About half what the industry was then paying.
The only reason that the new entrants even paid that much was that general aviation had been artificially inflated by the wages of airline pilots. If a 727 Captain made 120,000 then a Falcon Captain making 40,000 didn't seem so outrageous.The twin beech mail pilot made 30,000. Those days are long gone.
While I strongly support a national senority list within a given union, the idea of anyone being able to jump the current senority system based on free market principles will be, in my opinion, the beginning of the end of the superior pay, benefits, and quality of life currently enjoyed by the legacy airline pilot group.How so?
Management would give anything to break the current system of, lets call it tenure. What could be better, from their point of view, than to hire someone to do the same job for 70% of what they currently pay?(I know...you will say the contract won't allow that...it doesn't allow people to negotiate their own bidding position either, how long do you think any other part of the contract would be intact?)
Next, you hire someone to do the job for 50% of what the 70% guy is paid.
Don't think there are enough pilots out there who wouldn't work for that?Don't kid yourself. This step would remove all stains of scabbing, since it would just be a sanitized version of it. Senority jumping for higher pay.
In case you think I am some long time senior hog,I have had 4 different airlines fold from under me. I know damn well what it's like to start over. I also know that the only thing that creates ANY security once on a list, is the list.
Thoughts on how a national senority list could work are for another post.
(by the way..a national list is a different idea...the rules would be spelled out as the same for all...no shortcuts)
03-02-2015, 06:31 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2014
Position: Captain - Retired
Posts: 265
MaxQ, I appreciate your previous post on "Regionals" and also believe it's spot on. The current "Regionals" are the former "Commuters" with Commuter pay. I believe this was a concerted effort over time by management and mainline unions to allow this to happen to create a B scale pay structure.
I would also like to point out that I'm not advocating the elimination of collective bargaining for pilots but rather a way to strengthen the position of regional pilots to obtain more favorable agreements with the unions.
Yes there's always going to be someone willing to take your job for less money but it depends on just how much of a commodity our profession has become. Airlines still want quality pilots and after a while even cheap pilots won't do it for free anymore once the novelty of flying a jet wears off. Personally I think it's sad we feel this way about flying.
I think the current regional airline pay structure actually proves your point. Management knows this and they've used seniority to exploit it.
I don't think that's true. I think maybe in the past they saw the unions and seniority as a roadblock to lowering pay but now management has learned instead to exploit this same system to work in their favor. The end result is they have successfully lowered average labor costs across the board so the results speak for themselves.
Right now management can hire you into their company for the same job at far less than 70% or even less than 50% of your current pay (assuming you are a captain).
I also would like to point out that collective bargaining agreements between pilots and airlines are not dependent on the existence of seniority structures. Seniority is not needed to have effective collective bargaining with a union. It seems many pilots think that unions and seniority are one in the same.
Imagine how much more bargaining power union pilots would have if management didn't hold their seniority over their heads and they could possibly get a similar paying job in a lateral job move.
I wouldn't. There are a lot of pilots out there who have walked away from the profession and just stay out. If I lost my job at this point I wouldn't go back. I think if the airlines think it's tough hiring pilots now...just wait until half the current pilots walk away from the profession.
I appreciate your honest comments. I admit it's very difficult to determine what would happen in an industry that's never tried it. I would look toward other professions that require a high cost of entry and see how it works for them.
I understand that my arguments are necessarily hypothetical but if there was ever a time for change it's now when labor supply is tight. The change needs to happen at the regional airlines first (or only).
My main points are that...
I appreciate that and you have me beat by one. I've had three airlines collapse under me...fortunately earlier in my career.
I personally think a national seniority list would be even more difficult to implement and there are far too many interpretations of how to fairly implement it. Getting rid of something entirely is usually easier than revising it.
I would also like to point out that I'm not advocating the elimination of collective bargaining for pilots but rather a way to strengthen the position of regional pilots to obtain more favorable agreements with the unions.
Originally Posted by MaxQ
9G,
Some additional thoughts.
Whatever you will fly some airplane for, I will do it for less. And Joe will do it for less than I will. And Bob will do it for less than Joe. Etc.
The ONLY reason that airline pilots are paid what they are is from decades of collective orginization that provided a buffer between what they were paid, how they were treated etc, and what the laws of supply and demand would have paid them.
Some additional thoughts.
Whatever you will fly some airplane for, I will do it for less. And Joe will do it for less than I will. And Bob will do it for less than Joe. Etc.
The ONLY reason that airline pilots are paid what they are is from decades of collective orginization that provided a buffer between what they were paid, how they were treated etc, and what the laws of supply and demand would have paid them.
I think the current regional airline pay structure actually proves your point. Management knows this and they've used seniority to exploit it.
Management would give anything to break the current system of, lets call it tenure.
What could be better, from their point of view, than to hire someone to do the same job for 70% of what they currently pay?(I know...you will say the contract won't allow that...it doesn't allow people to negotiate their own bidding position either, how long do you think any other part of the contract would be intact?)
Next, you hire someone to do the job for 50% of what the 70% guy is paid.
Next, you hire someone to do the job for 50% of what the 70% guy is paid.
I also would like to point out that collective bargaining agreements between pilots and airlines are not dependent on the existence of seniority structures. Seniority is not needed to have effective collective bargaining with a union. It seems many pilots think that unions and seniority are one in the same.
Imagine how much more bargaining power union pilots would have if management didn't hold their seniority over their heads and they could possibly get a similar paying job in a lateral job move.
Don't think there are enough pilots out there who wouldn't work for that?Don't kid yourself. This step would remove all stains of scabbing, since it would just be a sanitized version of it. Senority jumping for higher pay.
I appreciate your honest comments. I admit it's very difficult to determine what would happen in an industry that's never tried it. I would look toward other professions that require a high cost of entry and see how it works for them.
I understand that my arguments are necessarily hypothetical but if there was ever a time for change it's now when labor supply is tight. The change needs to happen at the regional airlines first (or only).
My main points are that...
- Regional Airline pilot pay can't really get any worse so there's really little to lose.
- The unions and collective bargaining agreements don't have to go away just because seniority rules are relaxed.
- Bargaining power would be greater for pilots without seniority rules locking them down to their airline.
- Seniority would still exist and function within an airline on a less strict system to handle scheduling, vacation, priorities within base/type/seat but without the stranglehold on your job.
In case you think I am some long time senior hog,I have had 4 different airlines fold from under me. I know damn well what it's like to start over. I also know that the only thing that creates ANY security once on a list, is the list.
Thoughts on how a national senority list could work are for another post.
03-02-2015, 04:38 PM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 741
Hello 9 G,
Thank you for the civil reply.
I am distrustful of the outcome of changing the current senority system, but I believe I follow your basic premise. I suspect we have different expectations of what results to expect from letting some manner of free market effect how a pilot group decides pay, bidding etc. Different expectations, or perhaps better stated, starting premises, will lead to different conclusions.
I think myself too conservative to embrace a radical change to our current senority system, but do appreciate anyone who ponders its pros and cons. If nothing is ever questioned, then nothing can ever change for the better. (we just don't want it to change for the worse)
Thank you for the civil reply.
I am distrustful of the outcome of changing the current senority system, but I believe I follow your basic premise. I suspect we have different expectations of what results to expect from letting some manner of free market effect how a pilot group decides pay, bidding etc. Different expectations, or perhaps better stated, starting premises, will lead to different conclusions.
I think myself too conservative to embrace a radical change to our current senority system, but do appreciate anyone who ponders its pros and cons. If nothing is ever questioned, then nothing can ever change for the better. (we just don't want it to change for the worse)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
