FedEx/UPS Ever lift the degree requirement?
#31
There are a number of US carriers where it is easy to live overseas...not the same as being based overseas, but a similar experience. And, of course, there are a lot of foreign carriers where you can live or be based overseas (or live in and/or be based in the US).
#32
Uhhhh, yeah... about that. Maybe he was talking about the corporation as a whole, because that doesn't apply to our pilots. Sounds like both you and that Captain are still thinking lost decade and legacy bankruptcy contracts. According to the profile here on APC, AA's 757 12-year Captains are making $30/hour more than ours. Their 777 Captain rates are $36/hour higher.
Still a great job, but we gave up the top spot in pay a while ago and since most of our peers will already be on a follow-on contract by the time we sign our next, we ain't getting that back any time soon.
Still a great job, but we gave up the top spot in pay a while ago and since most of our peers will already be on a follow-on contract by the time we sign our next, we ain't getting that back any time soon.
Does anyone know if they have any 12 year 757 Capts? and how long does it take to become a 777 Capt? Regardless, 70% plus of our flying is widebody vs 70% plus of theirs is narrow. I would still like to see their pay rate numbers on property though.
#33
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,401
You are saying UPS/FDX would lax requirements that actually are relevant to the pilots they want to hire, but would not budge with something completely irrelevant to them? We'll see about that.
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 1,899
Actually, the tech industry is moving away from 4-year degree requirements. They are realizing they are mostly a scam and have got nothing to do with how qualified you are to do your job. Especially with new hire positions.
You are saying UPS/FDX would lax requirements that actually are relevant to the pilots they want to hire, but would not budge with something completely irrelevant to them? We'll see about that.
You are saying UPS/FDX would lax requirements that actually are relevant to the pilots they want to hire, but would not budge with something completely irrelevant to them? We'll see about that.
I’d be interested to see a job posting from one of the “big five” tech companies for a new engineering grad position sans degree.
#35
If you want to try to justify pay rates that are $30+ per hour less because upgrades might be faster at FedEx for the moment or we have wider access to those lower WB rates have at it. That might make you feel better or be a valid check mark in our list of “pros”, but it doesn’t change the facts.
Pattern bargaining is pretty simple. Pay rates don’t get an asterisk next to them during negotiations because we have more pilots than airline X making those rates. The simple fact is AA Pilots (and Delta) are being paid significantly more per hour to operate the same aircraft we do. Do I want to work there? Absolutely not. But, I think it’s important for our own pilots to stop perpetuating the myth that we are still at the top in pay just because we got there by default during the lost decade.
#36
I was commenting on the AA Captain’s statement (incorrect) and Postal’s acceptance of it as valid. That’s all.
If you want to try to justify pay rates that are $30+ per hour less because upgrades might be faster at FedEx for the moment or we have wider access to those lower WB rates have at it. That might make you feel better or be a valid check mark in our list of “pros”, but it doesn’t change the facts.
Pattern bargaining is pretty simple. Pay rates don’t get an asterisk next to them during negotiations because we have more pilots than airline X making those rates. The simple fact is AA Pilots (and Delta) are being paid significantly more per hour to operate the same aircraft we do. Do I want to work there? Absolutely not. But, I think it’s important for our own pilots to stop perpetuating the myth that we are still at the top in pay just because we got there by default during the lost decade.
If you want to try to justify pay rates that are $30+ per hour less because upgrades might be faster at FedEx for the moment or we have wider access to those lower WB rates have at it. That might make you feel better or be a valid check mark in our list of “pros”, but it doesn’t change the facts.
Pattern bargaining is pretty simple. Pay rates don’t get an asterisk next to them during negotiations because we have more pilots than airline X making those rates. The simple fact is AA Pilots (and Delta) are being paid significantly more per hour to operate the same aircraft we do. Do I want to work there? Absolutely not. But, I think it’s important for our own pilots to stop perpetuating the myth that we are still at the top in pay just because we got there by default during the lost decade.
#37
Uhhhh, yeah... about that. Maybe he was talking about the corporation as a whole, because that doesn't apply to our pilots. Sounds like both you and that Captain are still thinking lost decade and legacy bankruptcy contracts. According to the profile here on APC, AA's 757 12-year Captains are making $30/hour more than ours. Their 777 Captain rates are $36/hour higher.
Still a great job, but we gave up the top spot in pay a while ago and since most of our peers will already be on a follow-on contract by the time we sign our next, we ain't getting that back any time soon.
Still a great job, but we gave up the top spot in pay a while ago and since most of our peers will already be on a follow-on contract by the time we sign our next, we ain't getting that back any time soon.
I just smiled and thanked them both for the ride.
#38
For the record I never said I accepted the Captains statement as valid. Just simply pointed out what was said. The Magic of the Internet and individuals perceptions strikes again.
#39
Followed immediately by a new sentence starting with “So” (which in this context equates to “therefore”)
This would lead any reader to take the information following “So” to be directly related and in agreemwnt with the statement prior to it. Nothing magic about it. It’s English.
But, that wasn’t what you meant and you clarified that now.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post