Ornstein seems to be in agreement with Moak that pilots are going overseas to fly. This contradicts Bryan Bedford's testimony to congress that wasn't happening much.

I really get a little disgusted listening to these guys, politicians, talk about ‘race to the bottom’ because if we are in a race to the bottom, you know who we’re going to find down there? Congress,” quipped Ornstein


For once in his miserable life, ornstain is right!!!!! The only thing more pathetic than him is congress.

So lets b*tch on here some more and see where that takes y'all.

These threads are almost as rediculous as some of the remarks the CEO's make.

Why?

Because everybody on here continues to complain about the same thing over and over again and nothing is done.

Look at slavery, I don't care what the race...

Nothing changed until the people start standing up and speaking up for themselves.

I mean congrats to people voting no to concessions, but that's not enough. For the regional pilots on here, if you don't like it, why don't you band together make a website to get people together, take a nice trip to Washington D.C. like the good old days with picket fences or whatever people do these days and let your voices be heard?

I mean hey, I think you'd have more than enough qualified pilots not working at the moment that would be able to make the trip... Just an idea, an opinion....

But what do I know I'm just a lowly CFI...

Care to make counter-points here or on the article page, then? I bet we are all eager to hear the truth.

Not only was Global's comment a 100% accurate representation of what Johnny-O has done to this Industry (he forgot to mention the unlawful undoing of Aloha and his failed hostile takeover of ACA) but it warrants a reprint. RV5M's blatant ignorance to the truth has to make one question his underlying motivation to participate on these forums.

Exceptional post, Global.

He-He. Ornstein is "disgusted" with the race to the bottom? Is he serious? Guys like him and the way they have treated their pilots ARE the reason why young people and career changers don't want to become pilots anymore. For example, Ornstein created an airline called Freedom Air several years back? Why? So he could whipsaw Mesa Air pilot groups againt Freedom pilots in order to drive down pilot wages- wages that were already so low many of his First Officers could qualify for food stamps. If you read the pilot/aviaiton forums, Ornstein is allegedly one of the most depised regional airline CEOs out there.

And Johnnie O, it's not for your unions or your Captains to fix the problem you and your ilk have created. When there was a nursing shortage in the mid 2000's, hospital administrators didn't go around asking physicians to take pay cuts in order to fund higher nursing pay. They recognized reality (unlike you), and took the appropriate steps to attract new nurses into the industry. They raised pay. They gave them signing bonuses. They gave them perks like relocation assistance. What has the regional airline industry done besides cry in the press about their lack of ability to attract and retain pilots? Well, pretty much nothing. Entry level regional airline pay still hovers in the low 20's. A FEW regional airlines offer some meager signing bonuses, but it isn't enough. Stop blaming everyone else for the problem YOU created. Pay pilots a living wage, and they will come, eventually.

And Johnnie O., if you want to talk about "income disparity," let's talk income disparity. There are WAY too many links to post here, but Google "CEO income equality" and then get back to me about THAT topic. Talk about being out of touch. So yeah, you're right. Us pilots are not concerned about the same "income equality" that you CEOs are. You want to attract entry level First Officers? Don't look for other employees to subsidize the solution to YOUR problem. Pay a market wage, just lke every other industry has to do. Or perhaps examine the paychecks of you and your senior executives and start making cuts there.

The One Level of Safety rules did not kill turboprops. The consumer did. Passengers DO NOT LIKE FLYING ON TURBOPROP AIRCRAFT. You know that. I know that. That's what killed those types of aircraft. That's why Mesa doesn't fly turboprop aircraft. That transition started with Comair's initial success with the 50 seat RJ in the early 90's and it went on from there as THE CONSUMER drove the change from turboprops to turbojets. So yeah, some of those manufacturers were hurt in the transition from turboprop to turbojets, but from those failed companies came new ones. So Pratt, Garrett, and Honeywell make products for turbojets now instead of turboprops. The good companies adapt to change. The bad ones fail.

And BTW Johnnie O, it's NOT OK to have a 250 hour pilot in the seat of any passenger carrying aircraft. Just like it's not OK to replace you and your peer CEOs with the "best and the brightest" management school graduates with the ink still wet on their diplomas. Sure Mesa, for example, could save a TON of money by replacing you with a brand new, smart, college graduate, but that's probably not wise, right? No sane board is going to take a young, inexpericed yet "bright" management student and let him/her run a multi-million operation to save a few bucks on CEO compensation. Same rules apply when it comes to replacing placing people in SAFETY SENSITIVE POSITIONS like pilots. How is that difficult to understand? Again, a brand new, 250 hour pilot HAS NO BUSINESS in the cockpit of a US airliner just because a few foreign airlines use low-time pilots as "cruise" pilots (they don't do take-offs or landings) on widebody jets.

In conclusion, John, instead of whing on the mike at you and your peers' little get together, you should have been collectively been trying to COME UP WITH A PLAN to fix your pilot retention and attraction problems. Not complaining about federal air regulations. Not blaming unions for your pilot salary problems. You should have all gotten together and realized that hey, paying entry level pilots with six-figure debt less than what a fast food manager earns probably isn't a long term solution to the pilot retention problem you guys face.

He actually makes a valid point. "Captain" pay should be capped around 65k and FO's should start around 50k. There's no reason to reward lifers for their career failures. Get hired, get your time, gtfo. It's how it's always been.

Regionals with more than 50% of the flying is not how it's always been. The only constant in business is change. The flying public demand better safety, also not "how it's always been". With far more pilots vying for the sacred legacy jobs than can ever fill them, the industry has some tough choices to make, or face extreme downsizing.

What are you saying? All regional lifers have skeletons in the closet? They all screwed up in one way or the other and its entirely their fault they didn't get to a major? I for one am not bashing someone making 100k a year and getting 15 days off a month. But i suppose you will. :rolleyes:

JO does have a legit point...

Unions, not management, primarily determine how the pilot compensation pie is split up.

At mainline senior pilots fly bigger airplanes, which generate more revenue so it's reasonable they get paid more.

At regionals that model barely applies, so the income split has more to do with who's been around long enough to have control over the system. If senior pilots had their way new hires would get paid nothing at all, but the left lateral limit on that is that the company knows they have to pay at least barely enough to actually attract new hires. I've seen the company negotiate increased new-hire rates but I have never seen a pilot group make a big issue out of that. The pilots seem to feel that new-hires are the company's problem.

You seem to have as much of an "obsession" with cutting professional flight crew pay as management does! If you're not management, how about realizing that no regional pilot is overpaid, and try to help raise the bar for all pilots instead of taking management's side?