Some media get it

Subscribe
1  2  3  4  5  6 
Page 2 of 6
Go to
Quote: Globalisation is one of those issues that look good on paper,but tend to have some problems in real life.

In the constant drive to get everything cheap,we have put the hurt on US jobs. Now most of everything is made overseas. Cheap to buy,but the folks who get laid off may argue about the benies.
Good point, but...

Quote:
Protection is needed. You do not have to say no to the foreign carrier or company,but you do have to level the playing field. Example-- all pilots and fa s flying into the USA or over,must comply with FAA Rest and flight time rules if the rules are more lax in that country.
CAP 371 is the basis for flight time/duty time limits at UAE-based airlines… not sure about QR. I think it's generally superior to FAA rest rules. Which one do you follow, and how do you pick and choose if the foreign rules are perhaps superior than the FAA ones?

Quote:
I would like all airlines to pay the same for the ramper and other jobs,since the guy working on the ramp in the ME or China makes a small fraction of what the American gets.
Rightfully so. Why on earth can a ramper in the US make up to $40-50k a year throwing bags? It's insane! Nothing against rampers, but this is an unskilled, menial labor position. Want to fix an injustice? Why on earth do we have regional airline pilots (skilled technical position) starting at $20k a year, on par with rampers?

Quote:
So level the field.Until then we cannot let it go to purely market driven economics.
Leveling the field… I love it. Some interesting reading here:

HowStuffWorks "How Communism Works"
Reply
Quote: I'm sure the 'American pilot' barb was directed at me, not the author of the article....

You're correct, I'm not, and I only posted that to stir the pot a bit.

However, it does raise an interesting point. How would the US legacies fare in a head to head competition with others, not just Emirates, around the world? Landing and ATC fees would be the same. Ramp agents, baggage handlers etc would all be paid similarly. How would Delta, United, American 'service' stack up? If you don't think it would go well, then ultimately you're relying on government protectionism to survive. Do you vote in favour of protectionism and increased red tape, or free trade and less government protection? Which is better for the economy?

I'm sure it's a moot point because there's zero chance of this happening but it is still interesting to think about.....
Where do you live?
Reply
Quote: Why on earth can a ramper in the US make up to $40-50k a year throwing bags? It's insane!
Allah forbid that anybody should have a decent QOL and be able to make a decent wage doing menial labor.
Reply
Quote: Why? Did he need eye protection?

Carl
HaHa
Reply
Quote: Allah forbid that anybody should have a decent QOL and be able to make a decent wage doing menial labor.
I don't think he was advocating paying slave wages, but paying a full-time (2080hrs/year) baggage handler (unskilled laborer) 40k-50k/year to sling bags onto an airplane flown by airlines pilots (mandated Federal certificated training) making approx. avg. industry 75k/year working approx 1440-2500hrs/year) is out of balance.

If 40k-50k/yr is a livable wage for a baggage handler, then I think all airline pilots are due for a substantial compensation package increase to match that of an unskilled laborer.
Reply
Quote: I don't think he was advocating paying slave wages, but paying a full-time (2080hrs/year) baggage handler (unskilled laborer) 40k-50k/year to sling bags onto an airplane flown by airlines pilots (mandated Federal certificated training) making approx. avg. industry 75k/year working approx 1440-2500hrs/year) is out of balance.

If 40k-50k/yr is a livable wage for a baggage handler, then I think all airline pilots are due for a substantial compensation package increase to match that of an unskilled laborer.
I don't think you'll get any argument from anybody here about OUR wages, but the fact that rampers here (in SOME places.. not all) are making those wages goes right to the heart of the argument as to why it is difficult for American carriers to compete with the ME carriers. It all adds up. Fuel cost subsidies they get, retirements that have to be paid here, their EX/IM bank financing.. all those things make it difficult. And now some Harvard azzclown is advocating for cabotage where we would have to compete with those state funded airlines. If you need evidence that this is a bad thing, look at the shipping industry.
Reply
It's a tough one to wrap ones head around. The ME carriers all provide housing or compensation for such, which ups the package overall. Included is free health care that the company provides for families. The wages paid are lower than US or EU standards, but include the additional benefits and it may come close. In some cases the housing that is provided is the equal to 50 thou a year when it comes to what a similar villa would rent for. Shouldn't personnel that are based in SF or LA be paid more than those in ATL doing the same job. The government even pays more at higher cost of living locations.

Funny thing is, the US pilots here are the ONLY pilots taxed on their salaries. Every other country does not tax expatriates (some countries do if one owns property). Talk about taxation without representation, the Brits love the irony.
Reply
Quote: Fuel cost subsidies they get, retirements that have to be paid here, their EX/IM bank financing.. all those things make it difficult.
Just to add a little more fuel on the fire. Love to see where you find info on fuel subsidies. Retirement funding is exactly the same as what you're getting at DAL now. Is it the ME carriers fault that some goofball politicians allow the bank financing. But then again, a trillion dollar order to Boeing will keep a couple of American workers gainfully employed for a few years. Oh, and why is DAL so in love with Airbus these days? Subsidies from Airbus? Why not order some wide body home grown airplanes?

Because the government does not really promote the protection needed to compete, don't blame airlines that have the full backing of their governments. You could even make the argument that ATL was built on the backs of Delta and Eastern to some extent and in the day, you bet they got some "good deals". But protectionism goes against the tenet of cheap cheap airfares for the masses that the government truly wants, re. deregulation.
Reply
Quote: It's a tough one to wrap ones head around. The ME carriers all provide housing or compensation for such, which ups the package overall. Included is free health care that the company provides for families. The wages paid are lower than US or EU standards, but include the additional benefits and it may come close. In some cases the housing that is provided is the equal to 50 thou a year when it comes to what a similar villa would rent for. Shouldn't personnel that are based in SF or LA be paid more than those in ATL doing the same job. The government even pays more at higher cost of living locations.

Funny thing is, the US pilots here are the ONLY pilots taxed on their salaries. Every other country does not tax expatriates (some countries do if one owns property). Talk about taxation without representation, the Brits love the irony.
What sort of job protections are in place over there? Is one able to commute to where one wants to live?
Reply
deleted.

see also: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ma...-airlines.html
Reply
1  2  3  4  5  6 
Page 2 of 6
Go to