Lab Rat

Question:

If ALPA cannot figure out how to successfully integrate two ALPA seniority lists following a merger and make everyone happy, what makes one think a national seniority list will work?

forgot to bid

I am against an NSL and there is no way I think you could figure out how to do it. And even if ALPA national created one, it better give me the option to opt out.

As to whats killing the airline profession? The evolution of the industry. Demand created growth which created competition which was aided by technology which created replacements. I think that goes for all levels of the industry and any artificial means to overcome or control that by would be short sighted, counterproductive and naive.

I'll digress for a moment, imho one of the major missteps in this evolution was that of the "paying their dues" attitude towards regional pilots. A Delta pilot was telling me back in the early 1990s he was talking to a 1900 pilot who was getting $12,000 a year, horrific working conditions and of course PFT. The Delta pilot decided something had to be done so he went to ALPA to complain and plead to them that this was not right and the union's response was "they need to pay their dues just like we (the pilot complaining included) did in the military." Or so he says, and i kind of believe him.

The only problem for "thats what they deserve" crowd was the small turbofan was right around the corner and the Brasilia became the ERJ-145 that outright funded the E-jets, the Challenger 600 became the CRJ-100 which grew to the CRJ-900, and the Saabs, 1900s, 120s, ATRs, Jetstreams withered on the vine. And the pay stayed at "paying their dues wages."

I don't see an NSL being a solution in any shape or form. It'd be like setting fire to your boat to help you see through the fog. Let nature take its course and in the interim just make sure pilots above, with and below you are treated fairly.

DYNASTY HVY

Seniority is NOT killing the industry , what is killing the industry is the hell bent rush to the bottom.
If a NSL was viable it would have been implemented a long time ago while some of you were running around the school yard .
Some of the airlines would probably love this idea as it takes concentration off of them and pits pilots against each other .
Too many folks are out here flying for less than they schould be to begin with and that schould be fixed and addressed before some wild idea about a NSL.

Be careful what you wish for !



Fred

RJSAviator76

Just curious... why do you guys think that regional airlines elsewhere in the world are all paying north of 100k a year for captains? I'm looking at an ad from a Middle Eastern airline advertising for EMB170/190 captains. Their average pay on this equipment is around $12,000/month. Similar job in China is advertised every day for $10,000/month starting salary, plus benefits and bonuses. Now granted, they all want typed and experienced pilots, but it really makes me think... this is an ad for professional pilots. It requires experience, it pays a professional wage right from the start, it has professional benefits and privileges.

Are U.S. airline pilots professionals? Frankly, I don't think so. I think U.S. airline pilots are a bunch of underpaid, whiny, lazy, shallow-minded, unable-to-think-outside-of-box primadonnas. I really do...

So an airline like ATA tanks putting a bunch of 737 and 757 pilots on the street. Logic would have it that these "professionals" would be able to find similar jobs for similar wages elsewhere. WRONG! Back to the poverty wage levels if they want to fly for a U.S. carrier. Name one other PROFESSION that does this where you go from making well north of 100k to having to start over in the same profession making less than 30k simply because you either changed employers or you found yourself laid off/furloughed... just one.

What's even worse is that U.S. pilots are perfectly OK with this system...

Sadly, that leads me to believe that being an airline pilot in the U.S. is no longer a profession - it is a socialist union thuggery where the true value of a pilot is degraded by a grossly outdated and flawed 'seniority' system.

Rhino Driver

I disagree. The military is the best example of this and proves there is nothing unconstitutional about standards and barriers to entry. Not every pilot wants (wanted) to fly in the military, but thousands of applicants are turned away each and every year because they don't or can't meet the standards.

What should the standards be for a PROFESSIONAL AIRLINE PILOT? Well, I'd say to start with, EVERY pilot occupying a seat in a 121 operation should be required to have an ATP. Maybe the requirement for an ATP should be raised as well, say 2000 hours total, or which, 1000 hours are required to be in multi-engine aircraft. Maybe a college degree should be required as well to obtain an ATP. We do want this to be a PROFESSION and not a trade right?

I'm quite certain the majority of the flying public has no idea the person sitting in the right seat of any given RJ may in fact be a 23 year old, 300-500 hour wonder, with little to no experience. I once had an RJ CA tell me that one of his FO's flew his first ever IMC flight with him on an airliner for goodness sake. This is ridiculous! No wonder this industry is where it is today. You may argue that even the majors have hired low time pilots in the past, and this is true, but the majority of those guys were sitting on the panel and not at the flight controls as they are today.

I'm sure there are countless good reasons for raising the bar, safety being one of them. It's currently too easy FOR SOME to become an airline pilot! This should be a profession of standards, and high ones at that. Until we raise the bar (ALPA/FAA), I'm affraid not much will change.

jonnyjetprop

I agree, it far too easy for a military pilot to become an airline piot. I'll assume for a moment that you'll bar your F-16 friends from getting an ATP, just because their jet isn't a twin. While I wasn't a military pilot, do you really consider a F-18 a twin? After all, it has two engines mounted side by side. What about the thousand of military pilots hired at the majors with less than 2000 hours? I guess they just don't have what it takes. We need to cut back.

The funny thing is that it was the major airline pilots of the 80's and 90's that gave away the regional flying. Most of those pilots were ex-military. So in one respect, it's the military pilots that brought this industry down. Thank god there is some civilian trained pilot to blame.

The real issue is that the very pilots that complain about the loss of flying to the regionals are the only ones who can take it back. You just don't have the backbone to do it.

Rhino Driver

I flew the Tomcat before the Rhino. Is that far enough apart for you? And I don't know too many military guys that get out with less than 2000 hours, although there are a few.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MIL v CIV!

Back on topic...my response was about raising the bar and creating some barriers to entry. You obviously must have been a 300 hour wonder.

forgot to bid

Absolutely correct.

And that 23 year old pilot, mind you a lot of the former 500 hour pilots hired at regionals were under 23, but that same pilot has something in common with many of the military pilots we have here at Delta in that a) they passed training and b) their first landing with more than 2-4 people on board came on their first OE. The RJ pilot had 50, but I know of a military pilot whose first landing was with a full domestic 767.
...

Why do we need to limit the amount of pilots coming into the industry anyways? The pilots aren't creating jobs, airlines are.

UAL T38 Phlyer

Rhino:

(And again, the original Rhino moniker was given to the F-4; long before even the A-model Hornet flew)

While I agree the military is self-limiting, it isn't a good analogy for the Free Market, Capitalism, or for that matter, Constitutional Rights and freedoms.

Yes, mil-pay is based on a seniority system. But within that system is a system based on merit...you don't get promoted unless you prove your worth (yes, we know there are exceptions to the rule).

Yes, entrance standards are high. But within your squadron(s), upgrade to section/division lead (2-ship and 4-ship Flight Leads for you USAF brethren), or Squadron IP is again based on merit. The guy who goes to Weapons School; the guy who ends up as XO or Skipper: usually based on Merit.

Unlike the airlines, your pay is not based on the MGTOW of your airplane.

The military is an interesting microcosm. During the Cold War, I wondered aloud that it was ironic we were fighting a foe who had similar operating characteristics to our own military! THEY decided what job you got; THEY decided where you lived, THEY decided how much you were paid, etc. I said: "I'm fighting communism..within a communist organization!"

The UCMJ is the best example of how the military is not exactly the same as the rest of society (regarding the Constitution). One set of laws for civilians; second (usually harsher) laws for the military.

Your argument would hold water if guys were going to civilian-owned and operated flight schools where they flew T-6As and T-38s, flying the same syllabus as the Air Force, and when finished, wondered why the Air Force didn't hire them.

Under the Free Market, there will always be some guy who wants to start a flight school, and some kid who wants to take lessons, who will believe that if he goes to their school, he'll next be a Capt on a 747. That's why I said people will never be self-limiting. You could extend that logic to say that is why we have laws, governments, the police, the military...maybe even religion. They apply the limits we won't self-impose.

Again, I am not aware of any profession where the government has limited the number of people who can apply/train for.

We do have a de facto limit on the number of airline pilots: the number of pilots the carriers are willing to to hire. That's not really any different than your argument about the limits in the military: a lot of guys want to get in, but (in theory), only the best get selected. Merit, again.

There WAS a time when everyone who was an airline pilot had an ATP. It was before de-regulation. But as soon as it was de-regulated, people rushed in to make money or find jobs (see my earlier post). There was no self-limiting, so we ended up with too many seats, not enough passengers.

Profits fell, except for upstarts. My theory? The most senior Capt at an upstart has 0-1 years of seniority...he's not geting paid much. To compete with the upstarts, the established carriers had to cut prices...and the bottom fell out of the major-carriers' pay.

I agree: standards for 121 ops should be higher. That isn't a limit on how many people can try: but it would be much more expensive for those going the civilian route. That's why, in the old days, the vast majority of airline crews were ex-mil.

Unfortunately, airline hiring practice standards were politically changed in the late 1970s. The change wasn't bad; the implementation was. To meet certain quotas, some pilots at United (and I'm sure, other carriers) were hired with as little as 150 hours and a PPL. Not a typo: one-hundred-fifty hours. I've got no problem with who they hire, as long as they hire the best-qualified. I believe in merit. That's not what happened. Once the bar had been set that low (experience-wise), the regionals followed suit.

And, if it was up to me, the airlines would be like the military: seniority AND merit.

RJSAaviator76:

The reason companies are advertising for RJ Capts in these gardens-spots for high pay is because they can't get anyone to do the job. It's the Free-Market again, and supply and demand. When you have hundreds or thousands of RJ captains available in the states, you can offer a low wage, and someone will take it.

But when there are few/no Captains available because the majority of the local populace has never driven a car, let alone flown an airplane, and living/political conditions are deplorable, you have to sweeten the pot to attract the talent you need. (And then, it is usually only for short-term).

When an ex-pat takes a job like this, even when it has big annual bonuses, the majority of them can only take so many years before they want to get out. Then, the airline hires another guy at the same starting wage...keeps their costs down.

jonnyjetprop

I was a 3000 hour wonder, thank you. I even had to have 1800 hrs. TT before I could get a job flying freight in a single engine piston plane.

I saw many military pilots being hired in the 80's and 90's with less than 2000TT.

You want to place some restrictions on getting an ATP. You want to front load restrictions that benefit you. That's human nature. I just wanted to point out that even some of your friends won't meet them.

Your right about one thing. It's not about mil vs. civ.

We both want the same thing.

So how do we do it. The unions and their members need to grow a pair and bargin for all regional flying to be brought back to the mainline.

Just my two cents.