Dropping ATP requirements passes comittee
09-18-2017, 03:37 PM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
If I had a dollar every time a pilot equates hourly payrate to seat capacity in a plane..........
09-18-2017, 08:25 PM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A320
Posts: 1,347
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
09-18-2017, 08:49 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 867
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
You have to factor in the employee costs and benefits, too. The 401k match value is lower, in general, regional employees are younger and healthier. This is where subcontracting pats off.
09-18-2017, 08:58 PM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,982
Some of these arguments made more sense back in the day (likely when they experienced this) when Part 135s and mainly prop/piston aircraft were doing actual regional flying, feeding mainline.
Things couldn't be more different than that now, with "regional" jet aircraft more modern and better-equipped than many, if not most, "mainline" jets. And now, these airlines have to meet the same 121 standards and fly routes that are even longer than many of the "mainline routes". Things made a paradigm shift a few decades ago, but they (the airlines) have managed to keep some pilots on a "B" schedule, despite having the "regional" flying rise to the level of "mainline", to make their bottom line better, by pitting these smaller "regional" airlines against each other. Like it or not, "regional" pilots are flying jets that fly just as fast as mainline to the exact same places, it ain't 1970 no more.
From a safety point of view, the goal should be just as much experience and safety at the "regional" airline level, as compared to "mainline".
Things couldn't be more different than that now, with "regional" jet aircraft more modern and better-equipped than many, if not most, "mainline" jets. And now, these airlines have to meet the same 121 standards and fly routes that are even longer than many of the "mainline routes". Things made a paradigm shift a few decades ago, but they (the airlines) have managed to keep some pilots on a "B" schedule, despite having the "regional" flying rise to the level of "mainline", to make their bottom line better, by pitting these smaller "regional" airlines against each other. Like it or not, "regional" pilots are flying jets that fly just as fast as mainline to the exact same places, it ain't 1970 no more.
From a safety point of view, the goal should be just as much experience and safety at the "regional" airline level, as compared to "mainline".
09-18-2017, 11:45 PM
#67
Seat 0B
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 791
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.
If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.
On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.
09-19-2017, 03:10 AM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 867
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
From a safety point of view, the goal should be just as much experience and safety at the "regional" airline level, as compared to "mainline".
09-19-2017, 04:54 AM
#69
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by JetDoc
HILARIOUS! You do realize that a "C" series Captain at delta will make $151.00 an hour MORE than a "regional" Captain for flying a plane that seats only 24 more people? Using your very own flawed math that would mean only $147.00 to split between that C-100 crew. Try again boss.
09-19-2017, 05:42 AM
#70
China Visa Applicant
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Midfield downwind
Posts: 1,919
Pilots are paid what they can negotiate with their employer.
Trying to rationalize that number with "value" or "importance" or "compensation commensurate to contribution or risk" is a fruitless endeavor, because they're simply not related. The argument for years has been that pay is linked to the amount of revenue generated (e.g. the 777 pilot hauls more people per hour than the CRJ one does), and the pay charts sort of follow that inclined pattern, but it isn't a direct link. It is ultimately supply and demand and market forces (including pattern bargaining) which decide these things.
Life -- and pay -- isn't fair. Nor should it be in a free market.
If you think the airline industry is weird, go take a look at most corporate business, where salaries and bonuses aren't publicly known and are often times individually negotiated. Two folks sitting right next to one another and doing the exact same job may have wildly divergent compensation and not have any awareness that their pay differs so drastically from one another.
Trying to rationalize that number with "value" or "importance" or "compensation commensurate to contribution or risk" is a fruitless endeavor, because they're simply not related. The argument for years has been that pay is linked to the amount of revenue generated (e.g. the 777 pilot hauls more people per hour than the CRJ one does), and the pay charts sort of follow that inclined pattern, but it isn't a direct link. It is ultimately supply and demand and market forces (including pattern bargaining) which decide these things.
Life -- and pay -- isn't fair. Nor should it be in a free market.
If you think the airline industry is weird, go take a look at most corporate business, where salaries and bonuses aren't publicly known and are often times individually negotiated. Two folks sitting right next to one another and doing the exact same job may have wildly divergent compensation and not have any awareness that their pay differs so drastically from one another.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Atrain77
Flight Schools and Training
10
02-09-2006 02:11 PM
