Washington Times - Pilot Shortage
08-20-2007, 11:12 AM
#11
Gets Weekdays Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Economy Minus
Posts: 1,053
Originally Posted by Cubdriver
This article is rife with accuracy. To lump the wage statistics of regional FOs in with major FOs is highly misleading. He or she has confused the mean, median, and mode.
Example salary set-
[ $20k $20k $20k $20k $30k $40k $50k $60k $70k $80k $90k ]
The mean, or average is $45k.
The median, or midpoint of the samples is $55k.
But the mode, the most common salary is only $20k.
So, in cases where there is a nonstandardized distribution as with pilot salaries, you have a bimodal distribution (or trimodal). You cannot present an average without skewing it badly.
The article skews a bunch of things. To report there is a pilot shortage without qualifying it with the larger economic picture of supply, demand, wage, and cost is ridiculous. If the industry has artificially suppressed wages, then to claim there is a supply shortage is misleading.
Throw this article on the heap of sensationalist journalism. You would think the Washington Times could do better. Unfortunately, there is a lot of this kind of thing getting airplay lately.
Example salary set-
[ $20k $20k $20k $20k $30k $40k $50k $60k $70k $80k $90k ]
The mean, or average is $45k.
The median, or midpoint of the samples is $55k.
But the mode, the most common salary is only $20k.
So, in cases where there is a nonstandardized distribution as with pilot salaries, you have a bimodal distribution (or trimodal). You cannot present an average without skewing it badly.
The article skews a bunch of things. To report there is a pilot shortage without qualifying it with the larger economic picture of supply, demand, wage, and cost is ridiculous. If the industry has artificially suppressed wages, then to claim there is a supply shortage is misleading.
Throw this article on the heap of sensationalist journalism. You would think the Washington Times could do better. Unfortunately, there is a lot of this kind of thing getting airplay lately.
08-20-2007, 02:39 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 1,385
There's no real reliable statistics here but the total number of FO's in the majors is a much larger group than the total FO's in the regionals. Even though there's a ton of regional carriers, they have very few pilots (comparatively) per company. Therefore the average FO salary is going to be skewed towards the larger population no matter what averaging method you use.
Before I get totally flamed, go to APC and add up the number of pilots working for majors and the number of pilots working for regionals. It's suprising how many more work for the few major companies.
Before I get totally flamed, go to APC and add up the number of pilots working for majors and the number of pilots working for regionals. It's suprising how many more work for the few major companies.
08-20-2007, 02:59 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,216
Originally Posted by 1Seat 1Engine
Before I get totally flamed, go to APC and add up the number of pilots working for majors and the number of pilots working for regionals. It's suprising how many more work for the few major companies.
you are correct with regards to where they get their numbers for average salary.
However, IMHO, the article is still very innacurate. I don't think the salary of a major FO should be used at all in the pay they report. A new hire FO at a major airline is not an entry level position. The article implies there is a shortage of people willing to take a job as an FO making $83,000 a year. Thats not the case. The majors and nationals have plenty of applicants who want those jobs.
There is a shortage of people willing to enter this industry for $25,000 a year, and that's what needs to be reported.
08-20-2007, 03:19 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
Originally Posted by Xray678
you are correct with regards to where they get their numbers for average salary.
However, IMHO, the article is still very innacurate. I don't think the salary of a major FO should be used at all in the pay they report. A new hire FO at a major airline is not an entry level position. The article implies there is a shortage of people willing to take a job as an FO making $83,000 a year. Thats not the case. The majors and nationals have plenty of applicants who want those jobs.
There is a shortage of people willing to enter this industry for $25,000 a year, and that's what needs to be reported.
However, IMHO, the article is still very innacurate. I don't think the salary of a major FO should be used at all in the pay they report. A new hire FO at a major airline is not an entry level position. The article implies there is a shortage of people willing to take a job as an FO making $83,000 a year. Thats not the case. The majors and nationals have plenty of applicants who want those jobs.
There is a shortage of people willing to enter this industry for $25,000 a year, and that's what needs to be reported.
Chinese and Indian carriers can't find enough qualified Pilots to be Capts.
08-20-2007, 03:55 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,216
Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r
There "is" a Shortage of Qualified Pilots willing to take those Jobs if you look to overseas carriers. It is going to hit the US in a few years too.
Chinese and Indian carriers can't find enough qualified Pilots to be Capts.
Chinese and Indian carriers can't find enough qualified Pilots to be Capts.
I won't argue about overseas carriers, and I also won't argue about a shortage of qualified pilots hitting the majors in a few years. It's going to happen.
The 2-3000 pilots who have apps in at Delta are for the most part the same 2-3000 who have applied to UAL, NWA, CAL, FDX, UPS, SWA, JB, AT, etc.
There are not enough pilots to go around for the postions that will need to be filled in the U.S. in the next five years. Raising the retirement age will help, but it won't solve the problem.
08-20-2007, 04:39 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 608
Wow! Kit Darby quoted in an article about the "pilot shortage."
Who'd a thunk. Where have I read that before. Oh yeah, all through the 90's. Somehow I have a hard time believing "experts" when their main agenda is advancing their own ability to make a buck.
Who'd a thunk. Where have I read that before. Oh yeah, all through the 90's. Somehow I have a hard time believing "experts" when their main agenda is advancing their own ability to make a buck.
Last edited by TheBaron; 08-20-2007 at 08:43 PM.
08-20-2007, 06:50 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Fifth floor, window
Posts: 290
The source of this story is the Washington Times, not the Washington Post - big difference. The Washington Times has a historical agenda; anti-labor, and it shows in its misleading story. The Washington Times is (or was) owned by the Rev. Sun Yun Moon, AKA leader of the "Moonies". I'm not saying a misleading (or poorly explained) story couldn't happen elsewhere, but its the Washington Times. Some research on that paper will uncover many golden nuggets of deception.
Related to the pilot "shortage": When I ask friends what they think a new hire co-pilot on regional jet makes they say, "oh, 65-80k". That is probably a good indicator what they think the pilots are worth, considering the skills and background. See how the Washington Times and other mainstream journalism lets nearly everybody down?
Related to the pilot "shortage": When I ask friends what they think a new hire co-pilot on regional jet makes they say, "oh, 65-80k". That is probably a good indicator what they think the pilots are worth, considering the skills and background. See how the Washington Times and other mainstream journalism lets nearly everybody down?
08-20-2007, 07:33 PM
#20
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
Originally Posted by chazbird
The source of this story is the Washington Times, not the Washington Post - big difference. The Washington Times has a historical agenda; anti-labor, and it shows in its misleading story. The Washington Times is (or was) owned by the Rev. Sun Yun Moon, AKA leader of the "Moonies". I'm not saying a misleading (or poorly explained) story couldn't happen elsewhere, but its the Washington Times. Some research on that paper will uncover many golden nuggets of deception.
Related to the pilot "shortage": When I ask friends what they think a new hire co-pilot on regional jet makes they say, "oh, 65-80k". That is probably a good indicator what they think the pilots are worth, considering the skills and background. See how the Washington Times and other mainstream journalism lets nearly everybody down?
Related to the pilot "shortage": When I ask friends what they think a new hire co-pilot on regional jet makes they say, "oh, 65-80k". That is probably a good indicator what they think the pilots are worth, considering the skills and background. See how the Washington Times and other mainstream journalism lets nearly everybody down?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
