Originally Posted by
DFWAviatior
Of course he gets it. How can anyone logically claim that a pilot flying for NAI is a scab and should be denied a jump seat when regional pilots are allowed on that same jump seat?
I am a corporate pilot, and I fly to and from my aircraft several times a month to get home for days off etc. I have flown from city pairs on mainline 737's and the same exact city pairs on 175's. You mainline pilots do realize that these regional pilots are flying routes that should be mainline routes and both regional pilots are likely getting combined pay of less than what the 737 FO makes?
If you want to know what your greatest threat is...it is regional carriers and LCCs. Cabotage prevents foreign carriers from encroaching on your domestic routes. Those are the routes your unions should have fought to the bitter end to protect. Alas, what is done is done.
Now, I am certainly not advocating denying regional pilots a jump seat. I'm simply trying to illustrate a point.
Now lets talk about protectionism and capitalism. I have flown on foreign carriers (Korean Air, Emirates, Qatar) on international routes. The equipment was better, the service was better, and the cost of my tickets were always around 30% less expensive than US based carriers.
Lets say the next administration or the one after that kicks out all of these carriers (which won't happen). How do you think the flying public will react to suddenly having to pay significantly higher fares? Fares that would then face even higher price pressure as there is less competition to keep prices in check (The answer: The public WILL NOT like it)?
Now, guess what population in the United States is a larger group: Those that fly in the back of airplanes or those that fly in the front of them? The politicians will try to appeal to the largest of these groups, and the flying public by far outnumbers those employed by the airline industry.
You may think that I am pro NAI, but I am not. If it were up to me, I'd love the United States to have a strong airline industry with no competition from foreign carriers. I'd love mainline crews to make 500k+ per year too. The reality is globalization happens...and funny enough it is the prevalence of rapid transport across the globe (aircraft!) that has been one of the key components of the increase in globalization.
If you drive a car, you are participating in globalization (even a ford or a chevy, as I've flown parts from Mexico and Canada to Ford and Chevy plants). If you fly an Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier, and even a Boeing, a lot of your components come from abroad. Thanks for helping crush the US aerospace components and manufacturing industry!
Do you wear clothes? Literally any article of clothing at all? Thanks for destroying that industry too!
Have you shopped at Walmart? Do you put gas in your car? Do you drink almost any brand of Vodka? Tequila? Scotch?
Our industry has so far been relatively insulated from globalization. Being prepared for a shift is smart. Clumsy arguments are not.
Globalization makes the argument that it's better for comsumers. Lower prices help the public! The problem is when applied to the whole economy the comsumer base dries up as all thier jobs are shipped overseas. Economists would say new jobs will form in response. That hasn't happened. With the help of H1b visas there aren't any jobs that can't be outsourced. Even if you need to bring the cheap labor here to do it. It's great as a business owner, not so much if you get paid a wage. I think people are waking up to this.
Globalization was a political choice we made. It hasn't worked, unless you were already rich. Time to roll it back.