So how much should a pilot be paid?
11-28-2005, 04:39 AM
#101
Self Employed.
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Corporate Pilot
Posts: 7,119
Vito
Vito,
I disagree with your assessment of the future. This latest generation was forged with the expectations that they would never earn very much. Just refer to some of the other threads in this very forum and you can read about how they chastise me for saying that 60K in not a lot of money. They are ready to spend a career earning less than a third of what you would consider minimum pay. Additionally, though they might fall apart during basic instrument flying or emergencies they can pull it together enough to get through training and somehow have managed to keep their RJ's aloft. I am sure that they could manage in a 757. Wasn't you who in a previous post explained in detail how the military can produce a 737 FO with less than 300 hours? Besides the classic RJ kid the industry is also full of beached professionals that do have thousands of hours and have spun their wheels outside of aviation to realize that it is no fun at all. These people can't take a FO position at SkyWest. I am sure that they would step in at a huge discount.
We are facing a totally new situation today. In the early 90's Lorenzo was trolling flight schools across the country to fill classes with 500 HR flight instructors to serve as 727 FO's. These days you have army's of idealistic RJ kids who will proudly tell you that they are not in it for the money. They are here solely for the "love" of aviation. Money is very secondary. Where I live in the pacific northwest there are three different aviation universities within 100 miles of my home. Each school is pumping out a few hundred new disciples each year. Back east I hear that a new and disturbing trend is of the middle aged career changer who will drop 65K and within 12 months are a newly minted commercial pilot.
Take a look around. The world has changed. You guys are enjoying the sunset of what once was a beautiful dream.
SkyHigh
I disagree with your assessment of the future. This latest generation was forged with the expectations that they would never earn very much. Just refer to some of the other threads in this very forum and you can read about how they chastise me for saying that 60K in not a lot of money. They are ready to spend a career earning less than a third of what you would consider minimum pay. Additionally, though they might fall apart during basic instrument flying or emergencies they can pull it together enough to get through training and somehow have managed to keep their RJ's aloft. I am sure that they could manage in a 757. Wasn't you who in a previous post explained in detail how the military can produce a 737 FO with less than 300 hours? Besides the classic RJ kid the industry is also full of beached professionals that do have thousands of hours and have spun their wheels outside of aviation to realize that it is no fun at all. These people can't take a FO position at SkyWest. I am sure that they would step in at a huge discount.
We are facing a totally new situation today. In the early 90's Lorenzo was trolling flight schools across the country to fill classes with 500 HR flight instructors to serve as 727 FO's. These days you have army's of idealistic RJ kids who will proudly tell you that they are not in it for the money. They are here solely for the "love" of aviation. Money is very secondary. Where I live in the pacific northwest there are three different aviation universities within 100 miles of my home. Each school is pumping out a few hundred new disciples each year. Back east I hear that a new and disturbing trend is of the middle aged career changer who will drop 65K and within 12 months are a newly minted commercial pilot.
Take a look around. The world has changed. You guys are enjoying the sunset of what once was a beautiful dream.
SkyHigh
11-28-2005, 08:53 AM
#102
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: A320
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by SkyHigh
Watch, LA,
I definately would work for a competing LCC. As for crossing a picket line it would depend upon the situation. Do you consider the new mechanics at NWA as Scabs?
Unions have never done me any favors. I feel that they are hurting the industry and country. My point in that statement is that there are a few thousand pilots out there who probably would cross a picket line. I wouldn't be too eager to strike in this market if I were you.
SkyHigh
I definately would work for a competing LCC. As for crossing a picket line it would depend upon the situation. Do you consider the new mechanics at NWA as Scabs?
Unions have never done me any favors. I feel that they are hurting the industry and country. My point in that statement is that there are a few thousand pilots out there who probably would cross a picket line. I wouldn't be too eager to strike in this market if I were you.
SkyHigh
11-28-2005, 12:22 PM
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
ALPA's role in the current pilot pay chaos
I saw the future of the airline business a couple of years ago in an aviation industry newsletter - on facing pages were two articles, one titled "UAL Declares Bankruptcy" and the other "Southwest Declares Stock Dividend".
In a deregulated environment, pilot pay is based solely on supply and demand, and sadly ALPA has been among the last to smell the coffee. While ALPA struggles to appear relevant, reviewing recent events reveals that all ALPA legacy carrier pilots have taken it in the shorts to remain employed in a competitive, deregulated environment.
Today's airline environment is the same one in which Costco and WalMart and online bargain hunting thrive, driven by the same market forces - supply, demand and low costs...
For the decades before deregulation, ALPA was able to demand high wages and the airlines kicked and screamed, but complied and raised fares to cover their increased costs.
After deregulation in 1978, the legacy carriers supported higher costs until increased LCC competition and September 11 spoiled the game. While LCCs were growing, ALPA demanded regulated airline pay and benefits then got their heads handed to them on the Chapter 11 platter. Of course, ALPA pilots paid the price in furloughs, lower pay and lost benefits. I wonder how much ALPA leadership has given up in the process...
Today, competition reduces fares, and strictly inhibits fare increases, forcing legacy carriers to slash costs, including pilot staffing, pay and benefits either with ALPA's concurrence or as a result of bankruptcy. Not surprisingly, ALPA has become a toothless tiger. Rest assured that airline managements have screwed this pooch and others as well, but that is a subject for another thread.
This turn of events sucks for legacy pilots, because it demonstrates that ALPA cannot control the forces of the economy. The sad news is that they took in millions in dues (including a bunch of mine) over the decades convincing their members they could do just that and get them big bucks for in the process.
The reality is that pilots are plentiful today. Accordingly, barring an unlikely severe pilot shortage, pay will never reach the $300k level. Because of that, a number of wannabes will drop out, leaving folks who pursue the career because they love to fly. That suits me just fine, because I prefer to share the cockpit with an "aviator" instead of an "airplane driver", just as I prefer to visit a doctor who loves his work more than his new BMW and country club membership.
Unfortunately for those who demand $200K to drive an RJ, human nature dictates that those who love their work will participate for less money... they are being partially compensated by the satisfaction of spending their working lives being satisfied instead of trapped in an anonymous 9 to 5 cubicle in some faceless edifice in some metroplex.
In addition, today, like it or not, pilots are considered and paid to be highly skilled technicians. Technology and regulation have determined that. The days of hairy-chested Ernest K. Gann types regularly slogging through thunderstorms at 7500 feet hand flying a radarless DC-3 with airports all around socked in are gone, replaced by long range airplanes with digital glass cockpits at FL 410 and instant A/G communication. Hell, even the technology in short haul RJs embarrass anything from the '70s. In true bureaucratic tradition, the FAA has regulated the industry to the point where we need to bring a F/A into the cockpit to go to the lav, and be prepared for a third degree interrogation if we need to divert.
Occasionally, a pilot must simultaneously exercise his experience, skill, training and judgment (the recent LAX Airbus comes to mind), but the frequency of those events declines steadily and are far outnumbered by accidents caused by human factors. Justifying $300k/year for saving the bacon of a planeful of grateful tourists is simply becoming a more difficult sell for ALPA when more pilots crash airplanes because they screw up.
More jobs have been made available since deregulation, so more aviators have an opportunity to make a living pursuing their passion. The fact that some were well compensated for flying during regulated days and for some time afterwards is a good thing, but ALPA failed its members because they failed to read the tea leaves and prepare for a true supply and demand market economy in pilot wages. But I guess they can be forgiven because they only had 27 years to do so.
In a deregulated environment, pilot pay is based solely on supply and demand, and sadly ALPA has been among the last to smell the coffee. While ALPA struggles to appear relevant, reviewing recent events reveals that all ALPA legacy carrier pilots have taken it in the shorts to remain employed in a competitive, deregulated environment.
Today's airline environment is the same one in which Costco and WalMart and online bargain hunting thrive, driven by the same market forces - supply, demand and low costs...
For the decades before deregulation, ALPA was able to demand high wages and the airlines kicked and screamed, but complied and raised fares to cover their increased costs.
After deregulation in 1978, the legacy carriers supported higher costs until increased LCC competition and September 11 spoiled the game. While LCCs were growing, ALPA demanded regulated airline pay and benefits then got their heads handed to them on the Chapter 11 platter. Of course, ALPA pilots paid the price in furloughs, lower pay and lost benefits. I wonder how much ALPA leadership has given up in the process...
Today, competition reduces fares, and strictly inhibits fare increases, forcing legacy carriers to slash costs, including pilot staffing, pay and benefits either with ALPA's concurrence or as a result of bankruptcy. Not surprisingly, ALPA has become a toothless tiger. Rest assured that airline managements have screwed this pooch and others as well, but that is a subject for another thread.
This turn of events sucks for legacy pilots, because it demonstrates that ALPA cannot control the forces of the economy. The sad news is that they took in millions in dues (including a bunch of mine) over the decades convincing their members they could do just that and get them big bucks for in the process.
The reality is that pilots are plentiful today. Accordingly, barring an unlikely severe pilot shortage, pay will never reach the $300k level. Because of that, a number of wannabes will drop out, leaving folks who pursue the career because they love to fly. That suits me just fine, because I prefer to share the cockpit with an "aviator" instead of an "airplane driver", just as I prefer to visit a doctor who loves his work more than his new BMW and country club membership.
Unfortunately for those who demand $200K to drive an RJ, human nature dictates that those who love their work will participate for less money... they are being partially compensated by the satisfaction of spending their working lives being satisfied instead of trapped in an anonymous 9 to 5 cubicle in some faceless edifice in some metroplex.
In addition, today, like it or not, pilots are considered and paid to be highly skilled technicians. Technology and regulation have determined that. The days of hairy-chested Ernest K. Gann types regularly slogging through thunderstorms at 7500 feet hand flying a radarless DC-3 with airports all around socked in are gone, replaced by long range airplanes with digital glass cockpits at FL 410 and instant A/G communication. Hell, even the technology in short haul RJs embarrass anything from the '70s. In true bureaucratic tradition, the FAA has regulated the industry to the point where we need to bring a F/A into the cockpit to go to the lav, and be prepared for a third degree interrogation if we need to divert.
Occasionally, a pilot must simultaneously exercise his experience, skill, training and judgment (the recent LAX Airbus comes to mind), but the frequency of those events declines steadily and are far outnumbered by accidents caused by human factors. Justifying $300k/year for saving the bacon of a planeful of grateful tourists is simply becoming a more difficult sell for ALPA when more pilots crash airplanes because they screw up.
More jobs have been made available since deregulation, so more aviators have an opportunity to make a living pursuing their passion. The fact that some were well compensated for flying during regulated days and for some time afterwards is a good thing, but ALPA failed its members because they failed to read the tea leaves and prepare for a true supply and demand market economy in pilot wages. But I guess they can be forgiven because they only had 27 years to do so.
11-28-2005, 12:23 PM
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: B737, Capt.
Posts: 384
Since it appears Skyhigh is a scab lover, perhaps it's time to treat him as one so he might better understand the implications. Would you converse with a scab in on the flightdeck? Why converse with a pro-scab here?
11-28-2005, 12:56 PM
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by jimmbbo
...The reality is that pilots are plentiful today. Accordingly, barring an unlikely severe pilot shortage, pay will never reach the $300k level. Because of that, a number of wannabes will drop out, leaving folks who pursue the career because they love to fly. That suits me just fine, because I prefer to share the cockpit with an "aviator" instead of an "airplane driver"...
I certainly am in agreement with the "the more money the better." but Ill be the first to admit that nowadays there are a lot of airlines...with a lot of pilots...and gas is getting more expensive...operating costs...etc. The reality is that the airline industry itself is fairly "young" relatively in the grand scheme of things and maybe what we are seeing is the inevitable scenario of the airlines learning what its going to take to survive in the real world. I didnt get into flying to make $300k a year...I got in because aviation is a passion for me. I anticipated that I may make 6 figures after a few years of paying my dues. What I didnt know is that I may have several years at a regional with extremely subpar pay (assuming the regional doesnt furlough or go under in the meantime.)...I most likely will suffer multiple furloughs...companies going under...moving all over the country throughout the duration...
I have the sicknes...truly I do...but I will be the first to admit that I have considered leaving the industry simply because of the fact that I may put up with all the bull$**** to the end only to find my carrier shutting down....furloughing...etc. Now lets say Im in the 40-50 year old ballpark with experience only in flying and nothing to show for it...no retirement...pension...nothing. And now I have to play the game again of trying to survive at another carrier by moving my family again etc.
Im pretty young right now, looking at a highly unstable industry (for the pilot) and Im wondering if all thats worth it just to be a "professional pilot." Maybe I am just a "wannabe." But in 30 years Id rather look back and think I left an industry to pursue what was really important in life. Id like to be able to look my kid in the face and tell him/her that I did what I thought was best for our family...and we have many great years to show for it (along with a stable future). I feel like if I stuck with aviation Id have to explain to my kid why I moved him/her all over the country...never saw them or their games...holidays...birthdays...etc...and potentially have been left with nothing at the end of all of it.
I wish the reality was like being in medicine...or law...etc. If I knew that as long as you endured the hardships while you were young...the payoff was fairly certain for your future. Currently it seems that things are just as bad for someone twice my age...and that is a truly scary thought.
Dunno...
Last edited by Irish Pilot; 11-28-2005 at 02:03 PM.
11-28-2005, 01:51 PM
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757/767 Capt
Posts: 642
Remember this when we're talking about how the LCC's have changed the rules of the game, etc etc...Southwest is a LCC, Yet their pilots are paid very well, so flying for a LCC doesn't automatically equate with sub-standard pay. Also another important point to consider, Last time I flew to London, Rome, Instanbul, Tokyo and Sydney, I never saw a Southwest 737. There will be a place for the legacy carriers in the future, and hopefully instead of gloating, about how their salaries are diminishing, we can all be proud when their salaries increase. A rising tide lifts all boats.....
11-28-2005, 03:03 PM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by Vito
Remember this when we're talking about how the LCC's have changed the rules of the game, etc etc...Southwest is a LCC, Yet their pilots are paid very well, so flying for a LCC doesn't automatically equate with sub-standard pay. Also another important point to consider, Last time I flew to London, Rome, Instanbul, Tokyo and Sydney, I never saw a Southwest 737. There will be a place for the legacy carriers in the future, and hopefully instead of gloating, about how their salaries are diminishing, we can all be proud when their salaries increase. A rising tide lifts all boats.....
It seems like it's going 1 step forward followed by 2 steps back.
If southwest hadn't hedged their fuel wouldn't they be losing money just like the majors? I know they do just about everything better than the rest but isn't this the one thing that has actually saved them?
11-28-2005, 06:01 PM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Posts: 521
Yes, hedging is the reason.
11-28-2005, 10:26 PM
#109
Guest
Posts: n/a
According to most WN would still be in the black even without the hedge. Just not so much.
11-29-2005, 04:21 AM
#110
Self Employed.
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Corporate Pilot
Posts: 7,119
My Point
Gentilemen,
You have totally missed my point. I am not a scab lover. What I am trying to say is that if you try to hold on to this 1970's union attitude it will burn you. Times have changed and you will be left out and the scabs will be in.
SkyHigh
You have totally missed my point. I am not a scab lover. What I am trying to say is that if you try to hold on to this 1970's union attitude it will burn you. Times have changed and you will be left out and the scabs will be in.
SkyHigh
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
