Originally Posted by
Freedom421
I think we should be more concerned with getting paid based on experience not on seniority. I don't want to displace any one, schedule and furloughs based off seniority, pay based off experience. That way if your airline changes your base and the new airline has a open spots you could possibly take a job with the new airline and not have to commute or move to your new base. Today you can take a pay cut, move or commute if your airline moves its bases. Or you can quit.
I think the biggest issue with this is the fact that interpreting experience is very subjective. For example, who is more experienced among a 2,000 hour carrier-based fighter pilot, a 7,000 hour regional jet captain, and a 5,000 hour 747 first officer? I don't think one can definitively point to a set of criteria and arrive at a black-and-white answer on that one because there are just too many variables to consider.
I know people with low time and years of flying who are great aviators as well as people with 10 times the experience but half the common sense. Sometimes experience cannot be measured quantitatively.
The way the system is set up now is in fact paying you based on experience. Experience, for the most part gets you the interview. You submit an application based on hours and level(s) of experience and that leads you to a job (seniority number). Hopefully the job lasts, but unless one has a crystal ball it is impossible to tell. We make the best decisions that we can with the information we have available.
What you are proposing sounds like a "plan B" in case the first plan falls through. That proposal in fact may do more harm than good with regards to hiring. In this hypothetical situation, most managers would assume hire a low experienced person because the pay would be much lower for the same type of work.