Ambulance chasers can make a lot of money. Believe me. And if, like airline pilots, there were 14,000 of them working for one law firm, I'm sure they would have a collective bargaining agent that would negotiate compensation based on some semblance of an industry standard. I don't know of many lawyers that are scraping by. As for public defenders, that is a choice that attorneys make and their income is dictated by what ever government constituency they serve but they're not making waiters pay, either. Seasoned medical, legal, pilots and other professions are recruited into government jobs, and the government must compete with private institutions and therefore pay pilots base salary and incentives on a basis consistent with an industry standard.

Just like everything else, trades have a certain value. It may vary and be inconsistent to a degree but there's a fundamental an underlying range that exists for the profession to remain healthy. Take a look at what the HMO short sighted approach to medicine has done to the medical professions. Enrollment in medical schools for US students is at an all-time low. Risk/reward

 

So we should make at least what Delta 320 guys make or more based on all the arguments.

 

What do you think they should make? Should they negotiate with each pilot independently? Should G4 pilots make regional pay?

 

The ability to achieve different settlements from one attorney to another is the case, not the average payouts to the attorneys.

Plumbers are the same, you are getting into a world I am very familiar. Rates vary and so does service.

I'm not arguing in favor of any of this but to know your enemy and know yourself......just trying to provoke some thought.

 

We should make what we or I am willing to get paid, the market dictates. You limit yourself on each end when you compare yourself to your peers. It's exactly what F & H is doing. They keep moving the bar in relation to our peers. We do nothing like our peers other than operate aircraft. How and when we do it is nothing like any other carrier, why limit ourselves to that comparison?

 

I completely agree. I can't speak for what happened during that incident you mentioned, but from an outsider's perspective, it seems as if safety has been replaced with the fear "of costing the company money" and potentially losing ones career over doing what you've been trained to do.

During an emergency situation you shouldn't have to stop and think about "Well, what will keep me from getting fired like that other CA did?" or the thought of losing your job and not being able to provide Christmas presents to your kids. There should never be any hesitation in decision making when it comes to safety...especially with the 80.

 

Your point would be a lot more valid if pilots were compensated based on performance and skill as opposed to longevity.

Unlike the examples cited here and later in the thread, the job of an airline pilot is nearly identical regardless of the carrier. I have a real problem with companies thinking that they can change their pilot compensation based on what the company decides to call itself. "ULCC" is a marketing term, not a license to work your employees harder for less money.

Particularly for an airline with margins over 20%.

 

Would I be able to hold PIT out of training as a new hire? Also, would i be able to commute for trips or is living in base a must?

 

Yet you've had an evac with Allegiant. Yours, with the others and all the emergencies for an airline the size of Allegiant is something you think is normal? Sounds like you're due for an eye check!!

 

Don't kid yourself. F&H attorneys are not that good!! Mediocre at best.