Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Major Pay Rates in 1977?


CAL EWR
11-05-2007, 12:04 PM
Anyone know what a senior major CA earned in 1977?
Anyone know what a 12 Wide Body CA earned in 1977? I believe it was about $125K per year. Anyone have any documentation like the pay rates from a major contract in 1977?

The reason I am asking is when I teach P2P (CAL ALPA) I state it is my belief that in 1977 a Major senior Captain made around $125,000 and if you run that into an inflation calculator (depending on which one you use) it works out to a little over $430,000 in 2007 dollars.

If you look at the mega contracts (pre concessionary) at UAL and DAL they didn't even make up the difference and those contracts are now approaching ten years old.

We as a profession have a long way to go!

Suggestion for the Moderators - Why not do some research and calculations and post a pay scale page of what an average 1977 pay rates (majors) would be today adjusted for inflation? Part two make up a chart for Major CEO's cira 1977 and then adjusted for inflation in todays dollars vs what they actually make today?


seaav8tor
11-05-2007, 12:46 PM
http://www.landings.com/_landings/stories/captainicarus.html

JoeyMeatballs
11-05-2007, 01:01 PM
http://www.landings.com/_landings/stories/captainicarus.html

I feel sick..............:mad:


HercDriver130
11-05-2007, 01:14 PM
Problem is you wouldnt just have to raise the pilots pay.... you would have to raise everyones pay..... FA's, dispatchers, mechanics, rampers, etc..... none of those groups which are unionized are going to stand by and watch pilots get a HUGE pay raise without demanding the same for themselves... now that $60 bucks a ticket ( which looks good but doesnt address all the issues ) probably becomes $200 or $250.... maybe more when you factor in all of the OTHER costs of salaries.... what YOU get paid is only a small portion of what it cost to have an employee on the books. The flying public would revolt.....

im with SAAB.... it does make you feel a bit sick......

RatherBGolfin
11-05-2007, 01:35 PM
Problem is you wouldnt just have to raise the pilots pay.... you would have to raise everyones pay..... FA's, dispatchers, mechanics, rampers, etc..... none of those groups which are unionized are going to stand by and watch pilots get a HUGE pay raise without demanding the same for themselves... now that $60 bucks a ticket ( which looks good but doesnt address all the issues ) probably becomes $200 or $250.... maybe more when you factor in all of the OTHER costs of salaries.... what YOU get paid is only a small portion of what it cost to have an employee on the books. The flying public would revolt.....

im with SAAB.... it does make you feel a bit sick......

That's where the problem lies. The price of an airline ticket has not risen since 1978. In most cases they have decreased. Until the price of a ticket rises with inflation, I think wages are doomed to follow suit. Management will always correlate the two in whichever way they want to spin it.

Ottopilot
11-05-2007, 04:10 PM
LCC's suck.

JoeyMeatballs
11-05-2007, 04:12 PM
LCC's suck.


I dunno there is one LCC that I know of that flies 73's and they make more than your 777 Ca's.................

Danzig
11-05-2007, 05:26 PM
I think that Otto's point is that LCC's contributed very greatly to the demise of the pilot pay standard.

mccube5
11-05-2007, 05:27 PM
but theyve found a way to keep ticket prices low while raising the bar, yes i know they lowered it first but at least theyve come back to reality.

JoeyMeatballs
11-05-2007, 05:29 PM
but theyve found a way to keep ticket prices low while raising the bar, yes i know they lowered it first but at least theyve come back to reality.

Well, SWA didnt "raise any bar", they just didnt drop faaaaaaaaar below like EVERY OTHER MAJOR AIRLINE

NE_Pilot
11-05-2007, 06:06 PM
I think that Otto's point is that LCC's contributed very greatly to the demise of the pilot pay standard.

I think the introduction of actual competition and the fact that the government no longer sets ticket fares (almost always insuring a profit) is what caused the pay standard to drop.

boilerpilot
11-05-2007, 06:38 PM
Since I took a decent amount of time writing these two posts, I hope people don't mind that I repost them here (as one post) so that the folks that only peruse the Major forums can offer any insight.

Saw this link in the Majors forum, very disheartening...........

http://www.landings.com/_landings/stories/captainicarus.html

Disheartening, yes, but not unreasonably so. I'm not sure that I can argue that even the minority most senior pilots should be earning close to a million dollars a year. And I don't think average airline pilot pay is $100k.

Raising fairs is also a dangerous game. While I definitely agree that the latest rush of decreasing ticket prices just to get as close to 100% load factor is financially irresponsible, the Supply Demand curve works both ways. Give out too much supply and your revenues decrease. Take away too much supply (effectively price people out of flying, and for more people than you'd think, $60 does make or break the deal), and your revenues decrease. There needs to be a happy medium. Let's say an airplane has 100 seats. If you sell 90 seats for 100 dollars, you make $9000. Sell 80 seats for $120, you make $9600. Yes, you priced 10 people out of flying, but you retained the other 80 people, for whom $120 isn't too much money. Why do you think WN does so well with it's 60-75% load factors, while Herb says "We aim for load factors in the mid 60s to 70%"? It's because WN is able to still price competitively and OPTIMIZE its load factors to provide the maximum revenue.

Anyway, back to pilot pay: yes, you're absolutely right that, especially at the bottom end, they've become criminally low, especially considering the responsibility on pilots' shoulders. But does that mean that a 15% biannual pay raise per year should be sustainable? I don't know about that.

A great pilot I know once said to me "Pilots don't get paid to fly the airplane while it's working. Pilots get paid to fly the airplane when **** hits the fan." And that's absolutely right. While you may pay 100 pilots $100,000 a year for 25 years (my math brings up $250m), think about the impact of those well rested, well paid, competent, happy, and intelligent pilots during just one hairy situation in those 25 years(hitting the runway on a CATIII/II, or performing checklists correctly). It doesn't even have to be a hairy situation per pilot. If because you have that competent and happy pilot in the cockpit you only avert one accident in those 25 years, you've saved money, seeing as accidents are measured in the range of about a billion dollars (internal study, will not cite source) when you count all collateral damage, liability, and actual loses, you've just saved yourself $750m. Of course, you need to figure out exactly how many pilots you have and what their actual average salary is, but keep in mind, this is still a very real and very valid example, because while you increase your pilot pool, you increase your flight numbers, which just increases your chances of a crash. Worth it? Worth it.

For context for my post above, let's look at MAG. Looking at their most recent financial data (includes subsidiaries), their block hours for the year stand at 571,827. Let's say that they stay in business for the next 25 years with no change, positive in negative, in either their pilot numbers or pilot efficiency (aka, pilot numbers stay the same, block hours stay the same). That equals out to 14,289,295,675 miles flown. Now, in 1996, the NTSB approximated that carriers experienced fatal .026 accidents per 100,000 flight hours, or about 3.8m flight hours between fatal accidents. It can certainly be argued that pilots make or break a carrier when it comes to accidents, simply on the statistics of pilot error vs mechanical concerns (I know, I know, if 8 things break that the pilot is supposedly able to deal with, and he/she can't and crashes, that's pilot error, but bear with me). So take those statistics, and Mesa will be exposed to about 3684 "potential accidents" (14b divided by 3.8m). It can certainly be argued that pilots make or break a carrier when it comes to accidents, simply on the statistics of pilot error vs mechanical concerns (I know, I know, if 8 things break that the pilot is supposedly able to deal with, and he/she can't and crashes, that's pilot error, but bear with me). So let's say that with any reasonable training (.026/100000 includes foreign countries too, so let's give MAG the benefit of the doubt) and maintenance, 95% of these situations can be averted. That still leaves 184 situations over 25 years where pilots make the difference. Let's assume that MAG is a much, MUCH less liable company than mine, and that they've figured that with all things considered, an accident will cost about $100m (that's basically the cost of the AC and 1.5m per pax, so no future loss of revenue, no realistic liability numbers, no raised premiums, etc) . That works out to about $18.4b in potential losses, or about $441k of potential savings PER PILOT PER YEAR! Of course, should pilots be paid that full amount? No, because of acceptable levels of risk, but should pilots at any carrier lay down and accept $20k salaries under the excuse that they aren't valuable enough of assets to earn more? Absolutely not.

boilerpilot
11-05-2007, 06:58 PM
Well, SWA didnt "raise any bar", they just didnt drop faaaaaaaaar below like EVERY OTHER MAJOR AIRLINE

Hm, don't know what to think concerning this. Yes, SWA pilots don't get paid as much as the 15%+inflation per two years projection that the article mentions, but bear in mind that they also fly 73s (and 15% every two years?!). That being said, if you look at the REASONABLE projections as forecasted by Capt. Koch (the ones that took Consumer Price Index into account) and adjust them forward four years, and you'll find them pretty similar to the salaries earned by 12 year SWA Captains. Of course, not all CAs earn that much, but if you find ones that work their trips right, you can definitely find some that do. And I'd bet that Capt. Koch didn't decide to use what the slacker Captains were earning.

Now, I can't touch the 74 (or current day T7 numbers for comparison), but at least narrowbody salaries at the evil LCCs isn't criminally out of line for what the narrowbody norm was back then. There's no denying that salaries have come WAY down, but let's not start the infighting between fellow pilots at different carriers! It's not the pilots who asked for lower wages, and I wouldn't come close to calling any of the LCCs scab-airlines filled with SJS pilots who would fly for pennies just as long as it was a big jet.

The blame lies elsewhere, shared among the sense of entitlement that the entire American public has (I actually think this is the worst one), the greed of some top management (middle management ain't that bad), the rising price of oil, the general surplus of pilots, the fact that I wouldn't say the job is getting harder, the general lowering of upper-middleclass to lower class wages (while widening the gap to the elite), and a bevy of other reasons that each take their toll on pilots' (and others') salaries.

seaav8tor
11-05-2007, 08:19 PM
If you look at chart for a stock price the big picture changes as you click, 1 week, 1 month, 1 year, 5 years, etc.

For this industry a good time frame to look back would be equal to how far you have to go. If you have 30 years to go, look back 30 years and draw a trend line. If you have 5 years to go look back 5 years.

Sadly a newbie looking back 30 years has to project 30 into the future, in which case the trend is NOT your friend. There is nothing in place to reverse the trend right now but a bunch of hot air "We're Taking it back", "Fix it Now", etc. Nice but no credible action behind it.

There are several items in place or in motion to continue the trend. Further improvements in automation, NextGen ATC, MPL, Labor laws, Age 65, etc.

seaav8tor
11-05-2007, 08:46 PM
That being said, if you look at the REASONABLE projections as forecasted by Capt. Koch (the ones that took Consumer Price Index into account) and adjust them forward four years, and you'll find them pretty similar to the salaries earned by 12 year SWA Captains. .

His "REASONABLE your term" CPI went to 2003. It's getting close now to 2008.

CPI 1978... 2003 was 2.82 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 282,000 in 2003


CPI 1978... 2007 was 3.20 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 320,000 in 2007


If you guys are getting 320K at LUV, good on ya! Haven't made any progress but at least you haven't fallen behind inflation! Good work men! Wish I could say the same for the rest of the industry.


http://146.142.4.24/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

boilerpilot
11-05-2007, 08:48 PM
Sadly a newbie looking back 30 years has to project 30 into the future, in which case the trend is NOT your friend. There is nothing in place to reverse the trend right now but a bunch of hot air "We're Taking it back", "Fix it Now", etc. Nice but no credible action behind it.

There are several items in place or in motion to continue the trend. Further improvements in automation, NextGen ATC, MPL, Labor laws, Age 65, etc.

Well, I certainly hope that I'm not the newbie, I was simply trying to put some context on the value of pilots. I do think that the trend will continue for the next few years, but with the rate non-legacy options are becoming better, I don't think it's far fetched saying that the majors will be forced to improve their compensation packages, otherwise they won't have enough pull from foreign carriers, freight carriers, LCCs, corporate, private aviation (not everybody wants to fly the big jets!), other sectors outside aviation, and, last but not least, a few of the top tier regionals to fill their ranks, which will in turn cause painful growth hampering.

I'll definitely side with you that the further automation of the industry isn't going to help our cause, though, but you have to keep in mind that while there are these trends pointing downward in pilot workload, there are also positive factors that counter them. Take for an example a pilot flying into LGA. The pilot today has much, much better equipment to provide situational awareness and aid in controlling the aircraft, but the pilot of thirty years ago likely had two other pilots in the cockpit (one extra one over today) and much less congested airspace. You lose a little, you gain a little. Would I say that it's easier or harder to fly today that it was 30 years ago? Well, unfortunately, I don't have QUITE that much scope to work with, but it's certainly something to consider.

Pilot workloads have and will continue to shift around to different responsibilities, and I personally think that a lot of the automation doomsday talk is a little silly. After Jimmy Doolittle made his first completely blind flight in 1929, did people say "oh, look at the avionics advances, well, flying's going to be a lot easier from here on out". Well, maybe, but I wouldn't say it did, it simply progressed from one challenge to another one.

boilerpilot
11-05-2007, 08:54 PM
His "REASONABLE your term" CPI went to 2003. It's getting close now to 2008.

CPI 1978... 2003 was 2.82 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 282,000 in 2003


CPI 1978... 2007 was 3.20 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 320,000 in 2007


If you guys are getting 320K at LUV, good on ya! Haven't made any progress but at least you haven't fallen behind inflation! Good work men! Wish I could say the same for the rest of the industry.


http://146.142.4.24/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

If you'll read what I wrote:

That being said, if you look at the REASONABLE projections as forecasted by Capt. Koch (the ones that took Consumer Price Index into account) and adjust them forward four years

AKA, add 4 years to 2003. I did the best I could, the CPI numbers for 2008 haven't been released yet. At least, as far as I know.

Not every Captain makes that much at SWA, as I said, it takes a little fancy work, but I'm sure that not every pilot at United made $100,000 in 1978, though please feel free to prove me wrong. It probably wouldn't surprise me at all, especially considering that Capt. Koch alludes to the almost $500k salaries that the 74 Captains were making.

EDIT:
And I'm not quite sure why you think that "Reasonable" isn't a fair word to use. Am I wrong thinking that 15% plus cost of living raises every two years indefinitely is excessive? While I understand in our liability obsessed culture these days, pilots are possibly more susceptible to being sued, is there anybody who honestly thinks that 15% every two years for thirty years is actually reasonable?

seaav8tor
11-05-2007, 09:14 PM
If you'll read what I wrote:


EDIT:
And I'm not quite sure why you think that "Reasonable" isn't a fair word to use. Am I wrong thinking that 15% plus cost of living raises every two years indefinitely is excessive? While I understand in our liability obsessed culture these days, pilots are possibly more susceptible to being sued, is there anybody who honestly thinks that 15% every two years for thirty years is actually reasonable?

No that's fine, I intended no sarcasm.... I think it's great I didn't know you guys were pulling in 320K. I wish my W2 Block 1 was in the 2XXs, you guys are Rock Stars, 320K is outstanding! My hat is off to you.

The link was a CPI calc:

http://146.142.4.24/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

boilerpilot
11-05-2007, 09:34 PM
No that's fine, I intended no sarcasm.... I think it's great I didn't know you guys were pulling in 320K. I wish my W2 Block 1 was in the 2XXs, you guys are Rock Stars, 320K is outstanding! My hat is off to you.

The link was a CPI calc:
No harm no foul!

And that's the very calculator I used to come to my conclusions :) .

Nashmd11
11-06-2007, 04:41 AM
His "REASONABLE your term" CPI went to 2003. It's getting close now to 2008.

CPI 1978... 2003 was 2.82 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 282,000 in 2003


CPI 1978... 2007 was 3.20 or.......... 100,000 737 CA needed 320,000 in 2007


If you guys are getting 320K at LUV, good on ya! Haven't made any progress but at least you haven't fallen behind inflation! Good work men! Wish I could say the same for the rest of the industry.


http://146.142.4.24/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

They do at UPS and FDX. I know of almost every CA here, Intl., is going to make around 320K. Thank Goodness. Some will pull in 375K, ANC Based guys.

OscartheGrouch
11-07-2007, 06:43 AM
LCC's suck.

Otto,

Nice post. Please check the reality that truly exists. First of all CAL is a LCC
who happens to go international and has different equipment to worship. LCC's where not the reason CAL destroyed the industry in the early 80's. B-scale, lower wages, the use of smaller (oh yes even smaller than the lowly 737) planes with even lower wages are just a few of the things that we can all thank CAL for.

If a carrier has been through bankruptcy they have lost all claims to be the answer to our dreams (CAL of late seems to be pretty haughty). Please don't blame the competition for business models that don't allow you and other employee groups to have the highest pay/benefits.

Lest one of the freight folks chimes in (and some of them are a bit haughty also) I think the folks here at SWA have some improvements to make. We are just bus drivers and we are no different than you. If you don't believe me than ask yourself this question, "would anyone here at XYZ airline miss me if I did not show up for work?" I think not.:eek:

ewrbasedpilot
11-07-2007, 07:05 AM
Otto,

Nice post. Please check the reality that truly exists. First of all CAL is a LCC
who happens to go international and has different equipment to worship. LCC's where not the reason CAL destroyed the industry in the early 80's. B-scale, lower wages, the use of smaller (oh yes even smaller than the lowly 737) planes with even lower wages are just a few of the things that we can all thank CAL for.

If a carrier has been through bankruptcy they have lost all claims to be the answer to our dreams (CAL of late seems to be pretty haughty). Please don't blame the competition for business models that don't allow you and other employee groups to have the highest pay/benefits.

Lest one of the freight folks chimes in (and some of them are a bit haughty also) I think the folks here at SWA have some improvements to make. We are just bus drivers and we are no different than you. If you don't believe me than ask yourself this question, "would anyone here at XYZ airline miss me if I did not show up for work?" I think not.:eek:


You're not serious are you? How many LCC's do you see flying B777's on 16 hour routes for $99? How many do you see flying around with $5000 fares? As for thanking CAL, how about thanking SWA for undercutting everyone (try USAirways out of PHL for instance) and driving everyone out of town? B scale wages were the brainchild of Crandall at AMR, thank you very much, NOT CAL as you eloquently point out. I have a lot of friends that work at SWA, but you ARE different than us. As Gordon so eloquently put it one day:
"you can fly CAL and SWA to Paris. Us to Paris, France, them to Paris, TX". Sorry, but your argument is full of holes...............:eek:

OscartheGrouch
11-07-2007, 08:06 AM
You're not serious are you? How many LCC's do you see flying B777's on 16 hour routes for $99? How many do you see flying around with $5000 fares? As for thanking CAL, how about thanking SWA for undercutting everyone (try USAirways out of PHL for instance) and driving everyone out of town? B scale wages were the brainchild of Crandall at AMR, thank you very much, NOT CAL as you eloquently point out. I have a lot of friends that work at SWA, but you ARE different than us. As Gordon so eloquently put it one day:
"you can fly CAL and SWA to Paris. Us to Paris, France, them to Paris, TX". Sorry, but your argument is full of holes...............:eek:

EWR,

There is that haughtiness that I mentioned. Please don't attempt to give me a history lesson about the airline industry unless you include where CAL fits in. I will go toe to toe with anyone (there is my haughtiness) in airline trivia. Fact is Texas International and CAL tried to put SWA out of business only because they didn't want the competition and wanted to continue to gouge the traveling public to justify their inefficient system. Why fix things when you can just raise prices (even during regulation prices were easy to get approved). Second, you are correct that Crandall came up with the B-scale in response to CAL being subsidized in their first bankruptcy and a recession at the time. When Crandall got caught trying to fix prices out of DFW he ran Braniff out of business and than pointed to low revenues, low wages at CAL, to convince AMR pilots to accept the B-scale.

In reference to how you and your pilots are "different" please do us a favor and elaborate. You certainly were different in the late 80's when I would have stayed in the Marine Corps rather than accept a job at CAL. You were certainly different getting subsidized in your two bankruptcies. CAL is certainly different in its debt to asset ratio and how it needs to gouge customers to make up for an inefficient system. As I said earlier SWA has issues and competitive factors to address or we will be right there with you.

As far as undercutting other airlines goes I will not apologize for giving the traveling public a decent product at a decent price. I am actually proud that some who you feel shouldn't be flying unless they pay a high price are on our planes. If USair or CAL or anyone else can't compete with us than I am not going to apologize for them leaving a certain market. Also, when we do "run" someone out of a market (I prefer the terminology - compete) we don't gouge people just cause we can. On routes that CAL has a monopoly do they charge a "fair" price. I would luv to see some evidence that they don't take advantage of their customers (i.e. 5000 dollar fares or even 1200 dollar fares domestic).

How's that for being serious. As I mentioned before please don't be so haughty without looking in the mirror and remembering where you came from. I certainly know where SWA came from and where we are for now and it looks pretty good so far. Standby though things are always changing in this industry and we will have to adjust. I won't be blaming others for what I don't have (bankruptcy might be the exception).

One last question: Is the reference to LCC for how much you charge the customer or a system that justifies low wages?;)

ewrbasedpilot
11-07-2007, 09:31 AM
EWR,

In reference to how you and your pilots are "different" please do us a favor and elaborate. You certainly were different in the late 80's when I would have stayed in the Marine Corps rather than accept a job at CAL. ......................

a decent product at a decent price. I am actually proud that some who you feel shouldn't be flying unless they pay a high price are on our planes. If USair or CAL or anyone else can't compete with us than I am not going to apologize for them leaving a certain market. Also, when we do "run" someone out of a market (I prefer the terminology - compete) we don't gouge people just cause we can. On routes that CAL has a monopoly do they charge a "fair" price. I would luv to see some evidence that they don't take advantage of their customers (i.e. 5000 dollar fares or even 1200 dollar fares domestic).

.................


Okay, from an AF pilot to a "jarhead" ;) here goes:
We are different (different mentality) in that the majority of our pilots are looking for more than an entire career of up/down/up/down/up/down/up/down flying our entire career. We enjoy the fact that we can move up to bigger equipment, foreign destinations, and in essence "see the world", rather than just the USA. We enjoy not having the "hurry up to the runway or gate (you know....the 35 knot groundspeed taxiing we see every day)" and "cattle car" mentality. Concerning your "decent product at a decent price": sure our pax pay more, but they get something to eat rather than a snack tossed at them, and can fly from EWR to LAX or SEA in ONE hop without stopping to collect their luggage three times and having it take 13 hours. They also have a choice of seats, first or coach, and usually a movie or two to watch. It costs a whole lot more to operate a B777 out of EWR too, hence we HAVE to charge a bit more to break even. And first class seats take up a LOT of room, so prices are set accordingly. I too have seen passengers drive for two hours, pay $20 a day for parking, and think they're getting a "good deal" because they saved $20 by flying on SWA. Good for them......... But even Wall Street is saying the party is coming to an end for SWA. Seems oil can't be hedged at $25 a bbl anymore, even by someone as good as SWA was at it. Welcome to OUR party.;)

ClipperJet
11-07-2007, 12:50 PM
Folks...bottom line is that the INDUSTRY has changed. Forever. The 70's payscales are not comming back. I don't particularly like it, but it is what it is.

Lots of industries change. The market moves on. Don't belive me? If you live in a small town, just go down to the square. The businesses there aren't the same as they were 50 years ago, or 30 years ago. Even though we all lament the demise of the family owned stores, we still shop at the new Wal-Mart Supercenter, because the prices are low and it's just so darn convienient. The workers and owners in the downtown shops didn't do anything wrong--the market changed. Many werre layed off, many businesses closed. As a result. they will probably never see the same revenues/pay they did in their heyday.

People who made 8 Track tapes had to change. VCRs are all but gone to DVD. The music industry is dealing with iTunes et al, and they now have to sell songs one-at-a-time (just like the 45s in the old days) instead on albums. They will probably have to change.

My point is this: Stop looking to, and living in, the past. It's gone. Forever. It's nobody's fault, but it's true.

Let's spend our time figuring out how to adapt to the new realities of the industry.

OscartheGrouch
11-07-2007, 01:35 PM
Okay, from an AF pilot to a "jarhead" ;) here goes:
We are different (different mentality) in that the majority of our pilots are looking for more than an entire career of up/down/up/down/up/down/up/down flying our entire career. We enjoy the fact that we can move up to bigger equipment, foreign destinations, and in essence "see the world", rather than just the USA. We enjoy not having the "hurry up to the runway or gate (you know....the 35 knot groundspeed taxiing we see every day)" and "cattle car" mentality. Concerning your "decent product at a decent price": sure our pax pay more, but they get something to eat rather than a snack tossed at them, and can fly from EWR to LAX or SEA in ONE hop without stopping to collect their luggage three times and having it take 13 hours. They also have a choice of seats, first or coach, and usually a movie or two to watch. It costs a whole lot more to operate a B777 out of EWR too, hence we HAVE to charge a bit more to break even. And first class seats take up a LOT of room, so prices are set accordingly. I too have seen passengers drive for two hours, pay $20 a day for parking, and think they're getting a "good deal" because they saved $20 by flying on SWA. Good for them......... But even Wall Street is saying the party is coming to an end for SWA. Seems oil can't be hedged at $25 a bbl anymore, even by someone as good as SWA was at it. Welcome to OUR party.;)

Yeah you know us Marines we are a little slow!:)

We will obviously have to disagree on some issues we have tossed back and forth in the last few days. Fact is we both (and all pilots) have to justify our career decisions based on the type of flying we do. I am perfectly happy with my decision and justify in my mind that I like the ups and downs (just don't exaggerate). I will admit that I was a little jealous when I visited Europe and Russia a few years ago but nothing beats Amarillo.


I would appreciate it if you would not engage in misinformation about our flight ops. I personally get no more than an average of three legs a day and usually with more block time and a shorter duty day than my friends at other airlines. It is called productivity. Just like CAL is not the same airline it was in the 70's and 80's, neither is SWA. Unless you have a radar gun please don't inflate our taxi speeds. FOM says no faster than 30 kts on a taxiway. If you have your radar gun handy please give our CP a call with the flight number. Also my wife would agree with your cattle call comment but if done right it sure is faster than the alternative. The new changes to our boarding process announced today might help things a bit. However your description of what our passengers have to do to get coast to coast is pretty funny (and wrong). I personally also like to work our non stops from PHL-LAX, PHL-PHX, PVD-PHX, MHT-LAS, BWI-PHX, BWI-LAX, etc. with another hop thrown in just for fun. So quit mischaracterizing our flght ops and how our passengers have "so" much to endure. Nice urban legends you are tossing around but reality is different.

OscartheGrouch
11-07-2007, 02:53 PM
Folks...bottom line is that the INDUSTRY has changed. Forever. The 70's payscales are not comming back. I don't particularly like it, but it is what it is.

Lots of industries change. The market moves on. Don't belive me? If you live in a small town, just go down to the square. The businesses there aren't the same as they were 50 years ago, or 30 years ago. Even though we all lament the demise of the family owned stores, we still shop at the new Wal-Mart Supercenter, because the prices are low and it's just so darn convienient. The workers and owners in the downtown shops didn't do anything wrong--the market changed. Many werre layed off, many businesses closed. As a result. they will probably never see the same revenues/pay they did in their heyday.

People who made 8 Track tapes had to change. VCRs are all but gone to DVD. The music industry is dealing with iTunes et al, and they now have to sell songs one-at-a-time (just like the 45s in the old days) instead on albums. They will probably have to change.

My point is this: Stop looking to, and living in, the past. It's gone. Forever. It's nobody's fault, but it's true.

Let's spend our time figuring out how to adapt to the new realities of the industry.

Great post Clipper! I was responding to those who like to play the blame game but yet don't look within at times to get a reality check. BTW are you former Pan Am 1(I am). Take care!:)

Bellerophon
11-07-2007, 06:03 PM
ClipperJet

...The 70's payscales are not comming back....

I'm very pleased, in my airline, that they aren't! ;)

At today's exchange rate /$:

1972.....BOAC.....Senior Captain.....B747.....$ 23,500 pa...$ 26/hr

2007.....BA.........Senior Captain.....B744.....$308,000 pa...$340/hr


Best regards

Bellerophon

pilotss
11-07-2007, 06:18 PM
Maybe it is because I am flying a plane from the Carter administration era they think it is appropriate I get paid in the same wage of that era.

Do we do it because we love the job?

I like roller blading too....and I do it every other day in the summer....but if it pays minimum wage...its called a hobby.

Nashmd11
11-08-2007, 08:36 AM
2004 Payrates.

777 CA-319.61 an Hour

757 CA-256 an hour

MD-88 Ca-237.37 an Hour

This is almost 4 year old rates. Add on a 3% COLA if you like.