I think you will find that it is not what you did, but THAT you did that will make a difference to you when you are 75. Life is about playing and winning games, posing and solving problems, and the momentary contemplation of such success upon attainment. Without knowing anything about you specifically, I can say without reservation that a flight student who is working through the ratings towards the derivation of pleasure, as he sees it, in the attainment of a flying job is much happier than he'll be when he arrives. In this last statement, one can substitute most any activity in the place of "working through the ratings" and see the exact same results.

I have come to the realization in recent times that the best things in life have nothing to do with aviation, per se. This doesn't mean to avoid it, because aviation as an activity is as worthy a pursuit as any other. However, regardless of the game being played, one must continue to play the game to keep smiling. For the desire to win and the working to attain victory is more noble than the contemplation of victory after the game is won. More clearly, that you picked a game to play in life (i.e. a career, among many others - family, etc) and played it well, surmounted obstacles, saw new problems, and worked through them, is what, in the end, will see you to be smiling as you depart this world.

 

Boy did you hit the nail right on the head. If I had known what I know now back when I was 19 I probably would have gotten just a PPL and instrument rating and left it at that. Would have about $25,000 more dollars in the bank if I knew then what I know now. I still say that back in the 80's it was an acceptable risk to persue, but now those times are over. I did notice you left 121 for a government job, smart move.

 

Can you share what the gov't flying job is with us?
What differences are you finding in the two different types of flying that made 121 flying unacceptable and the gov't flying more rewarding?

USMCFLYR

 

USMC -

I am not comfortable divulging too much about my job, as many coworkers are lurkers and I am a coward when it comes to anonymity. I apologize. That being said, I am happy to share some particulars.


121 flying is in no way unacceptable, but certainly an extreme lifestyle choice. My former regional had uncommutable schedules, most of which began at 0500 on day one and ended at 2300 on day four. This resulted in me moving to my domicile, as the prospect of traveling on my days off (leading to about 1.5 days at home a week) was too much. This was sacrifice #1. I did not enjoy living in-base, as the area was not somewhere I could live long term, nor raise a family.


As you can imagine, such schedules were also incredibly brutal on the body. To work 0500-1600 on day one and 1300-2300 on day four is akin to working a 9-5 in New York and Tokyo during the same week. By the end of my tenure, I completely lost a circadian rhythm. This led to "work hangovers" on at least one of my days off: despite living in-base and having three days off a week (on average), my body was reluctant to do virtually anything on the first day.


Now, for the good stuff. When flying a line, I had ultimate month-to-month flexibility. Through good work rules, I could effectively force the company to give me 4+ days off every month, use my travel benefits, see friends, and travel the world. For a young guy, this was fantastic. The ability to live wherever you want is also very attractive to some (especially those with spouses with good jobs), but please keep my statements in the first paragraph in mind. Another great perk of the job was the autonomy. I maybe saw my boss twice a year, and it was to say hello. No one is looking over your shoulder when flying (unless you have a jerk crewmember or fed), and there is a lot to be said about that.

Pay wasn't uncomfortable either, but wasn't commensurate with daily duties either. The sheer responsibility to just report for duty at 0400 - not to mention deal with MELs, weather, ATC issues, etc. - warrants good pay. The people I worked with were also top-notch, and there was definitely camaraderie. Sadly enough, I think that most of the brotherhood was engendered by long hours and sub-par treatment, but it was there no less.


Simply put, Government work abides by the Fair Labor Standards Act (you get paid for everything work-related) and the airlines don't. Commuting, uniforms (at some companies), medicals/internet-based recurrent (paid for at most companies, but you'll have to do it on your days off), preflights, postflights, maintenance issues, and the like are NOT paid activities at most airlines. At one point, I believe reasonable mainline payrates compensated for this, but outsourcing of virtually all non coast-to-coast flying to regionals has certainly effected the game.

In terms of a lifestyle, I'm home most nights with the G, get paid appropriately, am allotted time during the day for work-related functions. Again, it's not that airline flying is unreasonable (there are some facets that you can't get with any other job on the earth), but a lifestyle choice. Personally, I like to be home more than a couple days a week, I like to do errands after work (so I don't need to do them on my days off), and I like the egalitarian approach to pay that the Government abides by.

Sorry for the ramblings - I know my response was all over the place!

 

Well said. Beware though, among all these red-blooded social-conservative-in-name-only military and airline pilots who lurk this board, you might be labeled an outright communist for actually appreciating said economic egalitarianism endemic of the Government pay structure.

I like getting paid in dollars and not ILS's. The day we have a labor party in this country is the day I'll apply for a private job. Not holding my breath.
Congratulations on your govt job!

--break break---

USMC et al,

Indignation over my 'hobby pilot' remark is your choice. If the shoe fits, the shoe fits. What I need to reiterate, as it may have caused a misunderstanding, is that I'm not referring to one's ability to perform said duties or to behave oneself professionally in a workplace setting. Military background or not, this is not what I'm driving at. Simply put, if you do NOT primarily rely on the monetary compensation of a particular vocational pursuit, you are a hobby worker. You may feel you owe nobody anything, but people in that category erode and hinder the peer's ability to attain living compensation for the pursuit of their vocation. Nobody is saying being a hobby pilot makes you sub-par in the performance of the duties, it just undercuts others ability to bring home the bacon. In 'eff you I got mine America' this might be par for the course, and even of no moral objection to you; I just happen to disagree with it and consider it the fundamental source of the problem.

Because something is so "cool" to do, it pays crap. Some manage a way of dealing with that pesky "making a livelihood" aspect and get to still do it for the "coolness" factor. Ergo, it's a HOBBY. I'm not extrapolating anything, this is as simple a definition as it gets. But adjudicating on others that it's on them to figure out a way to afford their "profession" is quite literally diluting the value of their labor. This only floats around circles where "eff you I got mine" is embraced, so you do the math.

This actually reminds me of similar arguments made against having "Guard babies" in the Reserve Components. Only well-to-do separating O-3 and O-4s should be allowed the "priviledge" of serving their country in a fighting capacity because they could afford to do it on the heels of 10 years of sweet govt cheese. Meanwhile the Lts and junior Capts are there hacking the mish, giving the service a heck of lot longer shelf life than the separating major, and here comes these separating folks, elbows-DEPLOY boldface, storming in on a fat savings account, making remarks that border on openly questioning the motivations behind these broke Reservists attempting to balance their service commitments with paying the bills for their family. A mile in my shoes brother. Insulting? Yeah economic attrition warfare is what I find insulting from the well-to-do crowd. Hobby pilot is right.

EDIT to Add: I re-read the post and want to make sure you don't misunderstand my position as antagonizing or dismissing your life accomplishments. I just feel passionately about socio-economics and their place in our workplace, and I do feel pilots who do not rely on their pilot jobs as a primary source of income are not a positive input to the attainment of a livelihood for the median worker and, as socialistic as it may ring for some, some sense of social equity should exist when making these "vocational" choices.