Originally Posted by
FriendlyPilot
Everything you are saying is true and if I were at Frontier I'd want the same. The problem is the revenue compared to other airlines.
Frontier had $3.77B in revenue in 2024. With 2,200 (I'm guessing) pilots that means that each pilot is responsible for $1.71M in revenue.
Southwest had $27.5B in revenue in 2024. With 10,000 pilots (also guessing) that is $2.75M in revenue per pilot.
United had $57B revenue in 2024. With 17,000 pilots (close guess) that's $3.35M revenue per pilot.
Alaska generates over $3M in revenue per pilot and Jetblue about $2.1M.
Unions use the leverage they have to decide a pay scheme for pilots. Its harder to compare a NB pilot at Delta or United to an LCC that generates far less revenue per pilot. Certainly the WB planes at UAL and DAL generate far more revenue than a NB plane, but the union pay scheme sort of averages all that out. There is no way United or Delta could afford to pay its NB pilots what they get paid now without those WB planes flying much higher revenue per pax plus cargo.
I don't believe that your management is going to agree to pilot compensation rates that give them a $1 profit. If management agreed to pay 100% of 2024 profits to its pilots (its most profitable year since 2019), it would have resulted in roughly $38k per pilot.
While everything you are saying is true and your frustration is understandable, the people you are negotiating with are also looking at trying to run a profitable business in a historically ultra-competive industry.
Another non-apples to apples comparison in some cases.
Best comparison you have are ONLY domestic (73/320/1) carrier - all others don't apply as you're using bottom line #s (revenue) from all streams (widebody, narrow body and even regional). But let's look at that...
SW started out a small Tx airline in the early 70s and grew to what they are today. They USED to pay their pilots less than industry standard and charged less for tickets. But they had GREAT customer service (ie. they INVESTED in a culture and gave the employees many perks in lieu of actual salary). It paid off. Now, they've built a brand and customer following that they don't have to be LCC anymore.
F9 isn't doing that. I bet it surprises a lot of people but F9 has been in business since 1994. Of course, much different history and path til today but this is NOT a new airline. We used to offer 1st class, Direct TV inflight entertainment and even had a regional. Long story short, exiting 9/11, Indigo swept in, purchased the airline for literal pennies on the dollar and CONVERTED it to a ULCC.
THIS IS KEY!!!!
They could've decided to make it another SW. Or maybe even continue to operate like a legacy and offer legacy type attributes. Hell, it could've even decided to be a regional for UA perhaps. But the decision was made to be a ULCC. So the revenue path was CHOSEN to be of this nature. Fast forward to 2025 (30 years later) and all the other airlines have found ways to make more revenue per pilot - as you state. Why can't F9, according to your logic, find ways to generate the same revenue per pilot? Haven't they had enough time?
Many different answers come to mind. But the real question isn't how but WHY. Who's fault is it that the company lags in revenue generation? Or more importantly,
Should F9 labor suffer because mgt hasn't figured out how to better run the company as well as just about EVERY OTHER airline?
It's been calculated that a F9 pilot wage increase to the current SW rate would mean a ticket price increase of about $5 /ticket. But, that's just one way of paying the bill. There are several others - all of which, I couldn't care less how they do it. It's just their job to do it (w/o decreasing the compensation I already make). Pilots deserve a RAISE if for no other reason than everyone else has gotten one (the value of the labor has increased). I mean, it is a
market is it not?
As a side not, shouldn't your revenue per pilot (or labor person) follow for ALL labor groups? FAs, Mx, back office? Everyone?
The CEO of F9 makes more in salary than Jet Blue and Alaska CEOs (and that's with a stock that has lost 3/4 of it's value)...