Envoy
#5311
I'm seriously considering trying to go on a nine month deployment. I figure if I do, then all my peers will have time to make up the 500 hours of military PIC that Envoy wants to use to force me to be a captain. When I come back I'll have gained some seniority and get a say in what I want to do again.
Genius idea! If I could find some orders I would lol
I wish my wife’s orders counter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#5312
See, I've done both as well. I get what you are saying. I've had some hard jobs and being an airline pilot is not one of them.
The thing is, however, there is a big difference between airline and military flying, especially the acceptable risk. You can see this in the safety culture and the accident rates. The last fatal crash involving a US airline was what... seven years ago? The last fatal military crash was how many days ago? We still discuss the factors that lead to Colgan 3407, in the Army I saw factors that lead to past crashes still present years later.
Much of this has to do with the public. Again, people outside the airlines still discuss and remember Colgan 3407. Military crashes from 2009? Please.
This cultural difference is especially prevalent in crew rest rules. The Army plays lip service to crew schedules and giving crews adequate rest. Heck, I remember the Army waking me at 0530 for chow (because the Army eats breakfast at 0530 ya know), then telling me to "rest" in a crowded, noisy hanger for a 2000 NVG launch and fly until 0800 then passing out under my aircraft on the tarmac as it's being fueled. The airlines learned a while ago that it falls under the "bad" column when crews start hallucinating due to fatigue. Flying seven days in a row with chicken plate, many of them with NVGs. Wake up tomorrow at 0300 for an early NVG mission, the next day try to sleep in for a late mission. Only knowing what day it is by the crap served in the chow hall.
Now when I say "airlines", perhaps I should clarify by saying "airline unions". It's not that management is bad or wants to be unsafe. Fatal crashes are bad for business. It's just that they have competing interests, so unions have stepped in and pushed for better (safer), work rules. No more "8 hour reduced rest with a 1.5 hour van drive in each direction to the hotel". They fought for the FAA interpretation that reserve is not rest. The better airlines now have pretty good hotels. The ones at my airline use to suck until we had a female FO attacked by someone hiding under her bed, followed a little later by a crew observing a gang hit at a Waffle House across the street from their hotel. Now the union and the company work together on hotels. Most are pretty good.
I could go on. But just because our last job sucked does not mean this job should suck just a little less.
The thing is, however, there is a big difference between airline and military flying, especially the acceptable risk. You can see this in the safety culture and the accident rates. The last fatal crash involving a US airline was what... seven years ago? The last fatal military crash was how many days ago? We still discuss the factors that lead to Colgan 3407, in the Army I saw factors that lead to past crashes still present years later.
Much of this has to do with the public. Again, people outside the airlines still discuss and remember Colgan 3407. Military crashes from 2009? Please.
This cultural difference is especially prevalent in crew rest rules. The Army plays lip service to crew schedules and giving crews adequate rest. Heck, I remember the Army waking me at 0530 for chow (because the Army eats breakfast at 0530 ya know), then telling me to "rest" in a crowded, noisy hanger for a 2000 NVG launch and fly until 0800 then passing out under my aircraft on the tarmac as it's being fueled. The airlines learned a while ago that it falls under the "bad" column when crews start hallucinating due to fatigue. Flying seven days in a row with chicken plate, many of them with NVGs. Wake up tomorrow at 0300 for an early NVG mission, the next day try to sleep in for a late mission. Only knowing what day it is by the crap served in the chow hall.
Now when I say "airlines", perhaps I should clarify by saying "airline unions". It's not that management is bad or wants to be unsafe. Fatal crashes are bad for business. It's just that they have competing interests, so unions have stepped in and pushed for better (safer), work rules. No more "8 hour reduced rest with a 1.5 hour van drive in each direction to the hotel". They fought for the FAA interpretation that reserve is not rest. The better airlines now have pretty good hotels. The ones at my airline use to suck until we had a female FO attacked by someone hiding under her bed, followed a little later by a crew observing a gang hit at a Waffle House across the street from their hotel. Now the union and the company work together on hotels. Most are pretty good.
I could go on. But just because our last job sucked does not mean this job should suck just a little less.
What happened to this industry where they started paying us more and needing more people? Because guys like myself left the industry 5 years ago and just now coming back because they actually want to pay a liveable wage.
Supply and demand, free market economy. Don't like it, quit, like I did when I didn't want to put up with the pay, and they will start to see that what they're doing isn't working... Or if it is.
#5316
Might have some luck on the ORD Facebook page if you’re a member. If not, then hopefully you can find one. The admin of that page fails to approve requests to join time after time.
#5317
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 210
I completely understand you and hear you. The original point was perspective. We live in America... And we fly airplanes for a living. Love life and love your job.
What happened to this industry where they started paying us more and needing more people? Because guys like myself left the industry 5 years ago and just now coming back because they actually want to pay a liveable wage.
Supply and demand, free market economy. Don't like it, quit, like I did when I didn't want to put up with the pay, and they will start to see that what they're doing isn't working... Or if it is.
What happened to this industry where they started paying us more and needing more people? Because guys like myself left the industry 5 years ago and just now coming back because they actually want to pay a liveable wage.
Supply and demand, free market economy. Don't like it, quit, like I did when I didn't want to put up with the pay, and they will start to see that what they're doing isn't working... Or if it is.
#5318
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,888
Or, just maybe, keep fighting to improve conditions as opposed to just walking out the door. If no one stayed to fight and improve five years ago, we wouldn't be close to where we are at right now. You can argue that if no one is willing to show up to work, then the company will know they have a problem and will rectify it. But my argument is without a group to push the ideas that are important to the line pilot, the company will still fall short. But if you're happy with current wages and work place rules, I'm happy for you. But I don't want to stop trying to improve QOL while there is still so much improve upon.
Almost every regional at the time took pay cuts, Envoy included. The result was that those who could stampeded for the doors. Management was then left with a shortage of pilots. And yes, it was a shortage. Don't confuse shortage with scarcity. Management then had no choice but to increase wages, benefits and improve QOL. Regionals are now fighting each other for pilots, not because anyone present at the airlines "fought the good fight", but because they can't find qualified applicants.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post