NAI and outcomes
02-21-2017, 09:59 AM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by David Puddy
Why does anyone expect that NAI pilots will be paid anything competitive considering the ultra low-cost model they use? Are Spirit pilots paid as well as Delta pilots? Not by a long shot even though they should be paid a lot better...
So, if NAI uses 737 MAX airplanes out of SWF and PVD and charges $69-159 each way to Ireland and Scotland, what would you EXPECT pilot pay to be?
So, if NAI uses 737 MAX airplanes out of SWF and PVD and charges $69-159 each way to Ireland and Scotland, what would you EXPECT pilot pay to be?
NAI pilots have zero leverage and no way to negotiate higher wages.
02-21-2017, 11:43 AM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 5,177
Actually, they have quite a bit of leverage in today's times. Turnover is an expensive problem more easily solved with pay that recruiting non-stop. Corporate pay in the NE is growing rapidly in the face of turnover, for example. We've added 20% in the last 18 months and isnt enough
As to Spirit and NAI, it is CASM that makes a ULCC, not pilot pay rates, but unit pilot costs per ASM at Spirit are still way under that of the legacies. Who's getting paid better?
GF
As to Spirit and NAI, it is CASM that makes a ULCC, not pilot pay rates, but unit pilot costs per ASM at Spirit are still way under that of the legacies. Who's getting paid better?
GF
02-21-2017, 12:40 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 5,177
I've been a chief pilot and I'm still not impressed with training bonds. Aviation is the most mobile of careers--just move and force them to find you, then serve you, then collect. Mind you, I don't think it's honorable, but reality is they can be hard to rnforce, IF you sign in the first place. They may find it tough to get enough pilots to sign on, let alone enforce it. B787 guys are in demand, enforcing a bond in China would be very difficult.
GF
GF
02-22-2017, 05:22 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
Not with a training bond they don't.
The problem for Norwegian, and any other airline dealing with high turnover, is the availability of training slots. If a guy leaves Norwegian at the end of his three years, it may take Norwegian 6-12 months to screen and train his replacement simply due to lack of training capacity. Not sure of the situation in the States right now, but European airlines are struggling with finding enough sim time and instructors.
Not sure of the airline pilot specifics, but a quick Google search shows that it seems to be generally accepted that it costs about twice as to recruit and train a new employee as is does to retain one.
02-22-2017, 05:25 AM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
I've been a chief pilot and I'm still not impressed with training bonds. Aviation is the most mobile of careers--just move and force them to find you, then serve you, then collect. Mind you, I don't think it's honorable, but reality is they can be hard to rnforce, IF you sign in the first place. They may find it tough to get enough pilots to sign on, let alone enforce it. B787 guys are in demand, enforcing a bond in China would be very difficult.
GF
GF
02-22-2017, 08:56 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 264
Originally Posted by NEDude
From what I saw of the training bond issue when I looked at Norwegian you are required to deposit the money into a Norwegian account, or secure a bank guarantee. If you duck out, either Norwegian holds on to the money or you have to deal with your bank. If you did the bank guarantee, it may be hard to come after you while you are in China, but you will have to deal with the credit issues of a defaulted loan when you return home.
All for the opportunity to fly for substandard US wages. What a farce. I'd sooner quit aviation than sell myself out for that.
02-22-2017, 02:51 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Airplanes
Posts: 1,378
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
Once again, it's not so much NAI it's what NAI represents and the damage it will do to the earning potential in this career. Flying an airliner is not entry level, especially transatlantic. Would you want your family flown by an entry level crew? Attracting the best and the brightest requires money and it's clear NAI doesn't care about that. And by design their model is going to pressure every other airline to conform just like has already happened in Europe. This is not a career there, it's an ok job. It's infuriating.
03-27-2017, 06:50 AM
#69
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 51
Considering the bad press surrounding NAI's expansion, I wonder if the US pilots taking these jobs would be limiting their future career choices? Would an ALPA carrier hire them in the future, after making a choice like that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
03-27-2017, 08:57 AM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by Windshear
Considering the bad press surrounding NAI's expansion, I wonder if the US pilots taking these jobs would be limiting their future career choices? Would an ALPA carrier hire them in the future, after making a choice like that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
