|
Would AA's lower 1st year pay keep you away?
In response to another thread, I'd like to poll everyone here: AA's 1st year pay is $40/hr, less than DL and UA who are in the $60s. Would that keep you away from AA if you had offers from all 3?
|
Also, keep in mind that AA will most likely come up to DL/UA pay with the new JCBA, just like DL and UA did after exiting BK and merging.
Poll takes into consideration the fact that all 3 airlines are very similar with regards to retirements, career choices, flying, etc. |
With the most retirements coming up at AA/US, you will make more in your career with a faster upgrade.
Don't miss the forest for the trees... http://i.imgur.com/IDH6rsX.jpg |
I usually tell people there is no way to give advice on what carrier to choose, because there are too many variables to take into account, over the length of a career, so even attrition is no predictor of the quality of a craeer.
That being said, if your personal calculations tell you it's smartest to go to UsAmerican, but you're spending more than about a minute dwelling on first year pay, then there is something seriously flawed with your logic. Or you're over 60. |
I would take an offer of employment from any of those three airlines, but would definitely choose DL/UA for that very reason. I have a wife and multiple young kids. Putting food on the table for that first year would be tough with AA. You can criticize all you want for failing to plan financially, etc, but I choose to have my wife stay at home, and that wouldn't be a possiblity with first year AA pay. Sure, a year isn't that long, but the debt that I would incur would last a lot longer than that.
I think it is only a matter of time before they are going to have to bump that first year pay up to match their competitors. It is a buyers (hirers) market right now, but in a couple of years, I suspect that will not be the case. |
CAL had thousands of applications when they paid new-hires $29.00/hr with no health insurance (2004-2008) for the first 6 months. I am sure plenty of people will apply
|
Wait..... so you are saying pilots care to actually get paid? Just thought being a professional airline pilot was a sickness:D
|
Originally Posted by nwa757
(Post 1519488)
With the most retirements coming up at AA/US, you will make more in your career with a faster upgrade.
Don't miss the forest for the trees... http://i.imgur.com/IDH6rsX.jpg So, one hired today would be at the 65% percentile roughly a decade from now. Assuming one upgrades at the 50% mark...you're still not making Captain within 10 years. *I'm sure there will be some growth, medicals and early retirees... |
Originally Posted by JoeyMeatballs
(Post 1519549)
CAL had thousands of applications when they paid new-hires $29.00/hr with no health insurance (2004-2008) for the first 6 months. I am sure plenty of people will apply
And it's not like 2nd year was some stellar amount EITHER. DAL/FedEx/SW were better, but not really that much better. Pretty substantial cut regardless if coming from RJ CA or mil O-3/O-4 rate. So to answer the poll, NO, it wouldn't stop me. |
Originally Posted by nwa757
(Post 1519488)
With the most retirements coming up at AA/US, you will make more in your career with a faster upgrade.
Don't miss the forest for the trees... http://i.imgur.com/IDH6rsX.jpg Just depends on who calls you first, IMO. And if you have a choice, which culture you would prefer to be a part of. |
Considering that $40/hr would still be a pay RAISE from my regional pay…NO, it wouldn't keep me away.
Now, if AA hired me, would $40/hr, with the promise of "pay parity" at some future date lead me to withdraw my apps at Delta/United/SWA/FedEx?…NO, it wouldn't, and I would probably jump ship at the first chance of higher first year pay at an airline that was already through the merger turbulence that is likely to occur over the next 3-5 years. |
Originally Posted by JoeyMeatballs
(Post 1519549)
CAL had thousands of applications when they paid new-hires $29.00/hr with no health insurance (2004-2008) for the first 6 months. I am sure plenty of people will apply
Joey, That may be true, but the whole industry was pretty much in the crapper then. In 2000 Pilots were leaving a lot of other airlines for DAL/AMR/UAL because they were paying more then. Pilots will follow the money. Scoop |
Originally Posted by nwa757
(Post 1519488)
With the most retirements coming up at AA/US, you will make more in your career with a faster upgrade.
Don't miss the forest for the trees... http://i.imgur.com/IDH6rsX.jpg Would like to compare. |
Originally Posted by Short Bus Drive
(Post 1519665)
Is there any charts like this for all the Legacies?
Would like to compare. They are not all the same with percentages or numbers of widebodies (tangible) or in their cultures (intangible). |
If they are all soo close in pay and retirement, then I would choose the one with higher first year pay no doubt. Another big consideration is the company culture.
|
Short bus..Great info on all airlines on main page.
American and US Airways: American Airlines - Audries Aircraft Analysis US Airways - Audries Aircraft Analysis |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1519661)
'
Joey, That may be true, but the whole industry was pretty much in the crapper then. In 2000 Pilots were leaving a lot of other airlines for DAL/AMR/UAL because they were paying more then. Pilots will follow the money. Scoop |
Originally Posted by NimbusSurfer
(Post 1519618)
So, one hired today would be at the 65% percentile roughly a decade from now. Assuming one upgrades at the 50% mark...you're still not making Captain within 10 years.
*I'm sure there will be some growth, medicals and early retirees... AA current percentages - junior CA - 58% junior w/b CA - 48% On retirements alone, every staying to 65, no growth, no early outs, first upgrades would be 11 yrs. |
Some info on United and GUM with 1st year pay...
If you don't mind going to Guam, United has a pretty sweet deal for first year pay if you get lucky. In GUM you get 2nd year pay during your first year per contract. Thus if a GUM slot opened in newhire training, you would start at $90-92 per hour instead of $61 per hour. That 2nd year rate goes up to $97-101 per hour on Jan 1 2014. In GUM, you also receive a $3000/month COLA, which equates to $36K per year. In conclusion, if you have the opportunity to go to GUM, you can now make at least $122K first year, but probably a lot more since most people get paid more than min guarantee. That being said, I would imagine since this has turned into a relatively good deal as long as your willing to move/commute, there are a lot of newhires trying to jump on it. |
Pay is only part of the equation. If a newbie had the chance to go to any of the 3 (UA, DL, AA), I'd say DL has shown itself to be the most successful in terms of growth and actually competing in the marketplace, and seems to be a relatively happy place to work.
AA has a tough road ahead in executing the merger, and the workplace environment, once the glee of the approval fades, will be horrendous for a long time. |
Originally Posted by Mink
(Post 1519962)
AA has a tough road ahead in executing the merger, and the workplace environment, once the glee of the approval fades, will be horrendous for a long time.
I understand you've always had a negative view of AA, but why would you make the comment that AA "will be horrendous for a long time??" If I recall correctly, DL merged with NW and turned itself into a powerhouse. So did UA with CO. AA has very similar assets that pre-merger DL and UA had, and we have an excellent chance at not only replicating what DL and UA pulled off but even surpassing them. AA's route structure and assets have long been a gold mine. Under the wrong management (like what we've had), it just sits and rots. Under the right management, it gets unleashed and prospers. AA has a lot of catching up and growing to compensate for the years of shrinkage, and Parker & Co are gonna have to take full advantage of that to realize the benefits of the merger and I fully expect them to. I'm not saying it's gonna be smooth sailing... we will undoubtedly have more than a few hiccups and disruptions with the integration of everything... but once it gets ironed out, I believe AA will be a kick a$$ place to work within the next few years. DL and UA also went through a period of growing pains after their merger... so will we, but in the end this will be a decent gig once again. |
And I want to to thank everyone for participating in the poll. The question of first year pay comes up more often than not and there are lots of opinions.
Me personally - if I was at a regional with offers from the Big 3 in hand, 1st year pay would probably be a few notches down my priorities list: pay at all 3 airlines evens out over the span of a career. Number One, or close to it, would be, "Where do I want to live and which airline has a base there?" I do see quite a few opinions centered around which airline has the best management (no question about it: Delta), and believe it or not, that would also not be in my top priorities - for the simple reason that "best managed" today can change in a heartbeat. |
Originally Posted by aa73
(Post 1519984)
???
I understand you've always had a negative view of AA, but why would you make the comment that AA "will be horrendous for a long time??" If I recall correctly, DL merged with NW and turned itself into a powerhouse. So did UA with CO. AA has very similar assets that pre-merger DL and UA had, and we have an excellent chance at not only replicating what DL and UA pulled off but even surpassing them. AA's route structure and assets have long been a gold mine. Under the wrong management (like what we've had), it just sits and rots. Under the right management, it gets unleashed and prospers. AA has a lot of catching up and growing to compensate for the years of shrinkage, and Parker & Co are gonna have to take full advantage of that to realize the benefits of the merger and I fully expect them to. I'm not saying it's gonna be smooth sailing... we will undoubtedly have more than a few hiccups and disruptions with the integration of everything... but once it gets ironed out, I believe AA will be a kick a$$ place to work within the next few years. DL and UA also went through a period of growing pains after their merger... so will we, but in the end this will be a decent gig once again. There is no guarantee that we'll ultimately deliver the kind of product that wows the passenger. I don't spend much time in the back, so I'm not sure Inflight is actually winning hearts and minds. You said "with the right management", and it's not clear United has it, and it seems doubtful to me that American will. There are more than a few items there to be ironed out. That being said, the networks at UAL and AMR are going to be powerhouses, no question about it. They'll thrive, or fail, on the employees, however. Nothing is a given there, especially not with Parker and his team, especially with them trying to take over a much bigger airline. |
I personally feel upgrade taken at first opportunity will be less than ten years. Including 2013-2023 retirements at the combined company hits roughly 43% of the total list. A lot of the total list do not actively fly and upgrades typically go beyond the 50% of the entire numbered list for multiple reasons. Throw in guys staying in the right seat and so forth. Upgrade based on retirements only is extremely conservative and from my past experience with worse case scenarios, actual upgrade still is sooner than predicted. That obviously does not consider company contraction.
|
Yes, chock me up as anti-AA. I think I have good reasons for my bias.
But, attempting to put that aside, there's no denying that the TWA/AA combo was a mess, and now you're jumping right back into a similar briar patch with USA East/West. Good luck. APA is dysfunctional. Period. AA management, and yes I know it's all going to change soon (hopefully for the better, but does anybody really know?), has been abysmal. The company has not competed in any sense of the word. Even if the new management team is The Second Coming, they are starting from a competitive position far behind the others. I know the poll question was about 1st year pay. I think all the majors (as was pointed out by somebody else) have similarly rosy prospects in terms of potential seniority gains due to the currently ancient pilot corps. I'm trying to point out that the work environment ought to be considered (beyond pay and projected seniority), and on that score I think AA has a lot to be desired. I appreciate others' ability to view everything in a positive light, but in the case of AA I think that kind of viewpoint ignores recent history. |
Originally Posted by NimbusSurfer
(Post 1519618)
According to APC there are 14,759 pilots at AA/US combined. Based on this chart (assuming zero growth, hiring only for attrition and no early retirements), 35% of the pilots are retiring in the next 10 years.
So, one hired today would be at the 65% percentile roughly a decade from now. Assuming one upgrades at the 50% mark...you're still not making Captain within 10 years. *I'm sure there will be some growth, medicals and early retirees... |
Originally Posted by Jetdriver7
(Post 1520018)
I personally feel upgrade taken at first opportunity will be less than ten years. Including 2013-2023 retirements at the combined company hits roughly 43% of the total list. A lot of the total list do not actively fly and upgrades typically go beyond the 50% of the entire numbered list for multiple reasons. Throw in guys staying in the right seat and so forth.
The 777 FO's at DFW are dominated by guys who could be flying CA 10 or 15 years ago. There are even a large number of narrowbody FO's in the same boat. I agree, retirement numbers alone mean little. It's a complex dynamic based upon domicile, outside income, etc. |
What you may be forgetting is not growth or stagnation, but potential shrinkage. The combined DAL/NWA list shrank by over 2,000 or so from the merger until now. Historically, a merger has never been 1+1 = 2, but rather something less due to contract productivity "enhancements" and route overlap efficiencies. Another quick, & seemingly simple search of the current (Nov. '13) seniority list shows 11653 pilots. A difference of 781 pilots. Where, may I ask, are you getting the numbers for the statement which I bolded above? |
Originally Posted by Gearjerk
(Post 1520106)
A simple search of the NWA/DAL Seniority List Integration award shows 12434 pilots on the combined list.
Another quick, & seemingly simple search of the current (Nov. '13) seniority list shows 11653 pilots. A difference of 781 pilots. Where, may I ask, are you getting the numbers for the statement which I bolded above? Maybe it's those DPA talking points you're listening to again? :rolleyes: |
Does everything have to be DPA vs ALPA with you? Now, back to the "why IHSWA" thread. :cool: |
Originally Posted by Mink
(Post 1520024)
Yes, chock me up as anti-AA. I think I have good reasons for my bias.
But, attempting to put that aside, there's no denying that the TWA/AA combo was a mess, and now you're jumping right back into a similar briar patch with USA East/West. Good luck. APA is dysfunctional. Period. AA management, and yes I know it's all going to change soon (hopefully for the better, but does anybody really know?), has been abysmal. The company has not competed in any sense of the word. Even if the new management team is The Second Coming, they are starting from a competitive position far behind the others. I know the poll question was about 1st year pay. I think all the majors (as was pointed out by somebody else) have similarly rosy prospects in terms of potential seniority gains due to the currently ancient pilot corps. I'm trying to point out that the work environment ought to be considered (beyond pay and projected seniority), and on that score I think AA has a lot to be desired. I appreciate others' ability to view everything in a positive light, but in the case of AA I think that kind of viewpoint ignores recent history. I certainly hope that's the outcome, and I have reason to believe it's very possible. But you can't look at AA's recent history and use that to judge the future, simply because AA's recent history still falls under the old management/pilot hate-fest. Looking forward, it's basically a clean slate. Mink, I hope if you decide to come back, that this place will bear no resemblance to the train wreck you left. |
Originally Posted by aa73
(Post 1520259)
I understand why you'd be biased. You make many good points. I, like most, am cautiously optimistic and treading very carefully: I just happen to think that if Delta could pull off what they did, what's stopping AA
Delta didn't exactly have the world's most motivated pilots back during their BK, but boy that changed when they realized they had decent new management. If we get the same (and I'm not saying for sure Parker & Co are all that), I think we could see the same situation at AA: a previously bitter pilot force does an about-face and rises to the occasion under inspiring management willing to go out, compete, and come out ahead. BTW, the Delta pilots, in general, are downright eager to do a good job. We were hired that way: people who have it in their DNA to earn every badge available to the troop. BK was an anomaly, but overall, as long as we're treated anywhere close to fairly, we want to do well. The theory is that we always had a company that had our back, and we wanted to do what we could, to make the reverse true. There aren't that many airlines where this is true. Maybe [curse be onto them] SWA. |
Sink r8: just curious on your opinion of Doug Parker and why he couldn't turn a new AA into a powerhouse, a la Richard Anderson.
I understand that Parker was limited in what he could do with USAir, given their size and niche status. Now that he has huge assets available to him, and a newly lean carrier eager to grow with employees eager to kick out the old guard and bring in new blood - do you not agree he has a great opportunity? Is he capable of pulling a Delta? Deep down, all pilot groups are essentially the same: they WANT to do a great job. It's the daily grind of inept management that stifles this desire. If Parker shows himself to be a leader, I believe we'll see the pilots of AA rise to the occasion. |
Sink r8: just curious on your opinion of Doug Parker and why he couldn't turn a new AA into a powerhouse, a la Richard Anderson. I understand that Parker was limited in what he could do with USAir, given their size and niche status. Now that he has huge assets available to him, and a newly lean carrier eager to grow with employees eager to kick out the old guard and bring in new blood - do you not agree he has a great opportunity? Is he capable of pulling a Delta? Deep down, all pilot groups are essentially the same: they WANT to do a great job. It's the daily grind of inept management that stifles this desire. If Parker shows himself to be a leader, I believe we'll see the pilots of AA rise to the occasion. To the original question... Since I can't take the poll via iPhone... Yes first year pay would be a concern of mine, but not a deal breaker. If I had the choice (God willing) I'd go with Delta because of their management currently, and United would be a close 2nd due to bases. AA I wouldn't turn down by any means, but I'd like to see what happens with this merger first. |
Originally Posted by aa73
(Post 1520365)
Deep down, all pilot groups are essentially the same: they WANT to do a great job. It's the daily grind of inept management that stifles this desire. If Parker shows himself to be a leader, I believe we'll see the pilots of AA rise to the occasion. Nothing succeeds like success. I think Parker has a window of opportunity that he needs to jump through quickly to win over employees, aggressively take on competitors, and impress customers. If he stumbles out of the gate, then I think the bitterness that exists at both USA and AA will multiply - another set of broken "promises", same circus/different clowns, etc., and he'll have an uphill battle getting employees on his side vs. the usual AA/USA model of them being viewed The Enemy. Best of luck, everybody. I guess we'll find out all of this soon enough. |
Watching the stars apparently starting to line up, I am very optimistic for AA
|
Originally Posted by satpak77
(Post 1520504)
Watching the stars apparently starting to line up, I am very optimistic for AA
First year pay is awful,hope that gets fixed soon. |
Originally Posted by ghilis101
(Post 1520549)
Keep in mind Analysts say that AA never actually "needed" to file BK,
Huh? In 2011 everyone was talking about AA filing BK some time in 2012. They just disagreed when. The majority didn't believe AA would enter 2013 without filing BK. |
Originally Posted by ghilis101
(Post 1520549)
First year pay is awful,hope that gets fixed soon. Doubt it, It has been that way for yearsssss. |
Originally Posted by NimbusSurfer
(Post 1519618)
According to APC there are 14,759 pilots at AA/US combined. Based on this chart (assuming zero growth, hiring only for attrition and no early retirements), 35% of the pilots are retiring in the next 10 years.
So, one hired today would be at the 65% percentile roughly a decade from now. Assuming one upgrades at the 50% mark...you're still not making Captain within 10 years. *I'm sure there will be some growth, medicals and early retirees... |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:54 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands