$1.00 per passenger per hour sounds like a good first year starting point...for an FO. With all the crap they tag on airline tickets I bet they could throw 1-2 bucks on a ticket without losing to many pax (not that they would need to).

Step two would be linking pilot pay to management pay and bonus, as well as retirement plan protection.

 

We shouldn't be talking about formulas for pay. Once there is a formula it becomes easy to manipulate.

Example: Airline says: This is a 100 seat aircraft, but we'll only put 86 seats in it so we don't have to pay 100 seat rates.

Example: Airline tells Aircraft Manufacturer, "hey guys" don't make anything over 100 seats, because it's not in our financial interest.

Example: Airline says "Screw it pilots" you'll fly a 50, 70 or 90 seater for us for the same pay rates or a smidgen more.


Yes, I know, formulas also prevent example #3 from happening if there is a contract. . . .

If you want formulas lets make some up:

1) $2,000 x (# years you are alive) + COLA for FO and $3,000 x (# years you are alive) + COLA for CA. (Eg. 40 yer old CA make $120/hr and 20 yer old FO makes $40/hr)

2) $1/pound gross weight of the a/c for FO and $2/pound gross weight for CA

3) 20% of the HIGHEST ticket fair sold per segment x Block or Credit hours of segment for FO . . . 40% of HIGHEST ticket fair sold for CA

4) Formulas based on MAX FUEL CAPACITY of plane

5) Formulas based on max range or endurance

6) Formulas based on # of obese passengers plane can comfortably hold

7) Formulas based on # of Flight Attendants needed for plane

8) Formulas based on annual aircraft usage and earning power plane has.

There are all kinds of different ways to calculate a salary range, but until pilots STOP working for $19/hr all this formula generation is bogus. I personally think a CRJ FO should be earning near $60,-$75,000 annually and a CA $90,- $120,000 annually with no more than 5 years experience.

 

Nice.. coming from a guy in the right seat of a 135! It's really people like you!

 

O.K. then, look at the thread title and use your "28 years" to understand it's a new industry "AND" new guys can't get your 130k job! That is why many (all) new pilots will gladly take what ever they are paid to fly for a regional...duh! If you come to the airlines 'cause you think you're going to make "bank" then you have bigger issues. I would like to make more but I'm not going to whine about it if I don't. I surely am not going to berate fellow pilots for the choices they make. Excuse me now I'm starting my 16 days off today...See Yaa!!!

 

Don't ya'll think this 70/90 seat pay argument has gone on long enough??

Stop ridiculing young Pilots for hopping in a -700/-900 for low (especially first-year) pay. You've beat this dead-horse time and time again and it's dead, dead, dead.

If you can't accept the fact that this is the way of the world at this particular moment, get out of the business. It sucks and nobody's happy about it. In the short-term all we can really hope for is a bit of a raise. Maybe in the long-term we can fight for, and win, the compensation that we deserve.

In the mean-time, nobody is going to get anything done if they refuse to fly these larger "RJ's." Or hey, we can all go to XJet, right?? For those guys (and not picking on ya'll in particular, just any exclusively 50-seat operator) - Don't berate your fellow Pilots because we don't have the scope you do...come on.

This post is for anybody like myself that's been close to leaving this forum over reading the same old arguments and finger-pointing.

 

No, I don't think the 70/90 seat pay discussion has gone on long enough. More and more "large small jets" replace narrowbodies at a fraction of mainline pay. Considering that and how Pinnacle, ASA, Mesa and RAH are all in contract negotiations, I'd say the conversation is just getting started.

Folks need to start fighting NOW for higher pay rates, ESPECIALLY as FOs and ESPECIALLY in the first year, because at this rate we're all going to be flying Bombardier or Embraer crap far longer than we ever envisioned.

70-90 seat jets at contract regional carriers might provide a short-term boost via a fast upgrade, but they absolutely are the downfall of long-term career expectations for 99% of us at the regional level.

Your posting here shows you don't seem to take criticism of your position well, even when it is objective, non-flame and well-researched.

If you're thinking of quitting APC because you're tired of "the same old arguments", I would tell you to grow a thicker skin because you're gonna be hearing "the same old arguments" about pay, workrules, unions and QOL the rest of your 121 career.

I'm for you much more than I'm against you brother....but good luck whatever you decide.

Frats,

BU

 

BoilerUP,

I take criticism very well, thank you...otherwise I would not have posted. Second, what really gets under my skin (which is fairly thick, thank you!) is the constant berating. You know as well as I do that there is far more finger-pointing here than actual, intelligent, posting.

In a way you are right, however - there are many of us larger "RJ" operators in contract talks at the moment...we definately need to stand together here. BUT, my idea of standing together is not what most posts I read are shouting.

That said, your posts are usually well thought out and non-antagonistic...my previous post was certainly not aimed at those few like you on this board.

 

In a 135/145 making $34 an hour second year...that is the point, I make more money flying a 37-50 seater than guys flying a 70-90 seater on second year pay....WHAT PART OF THAT IS VERY WRONG, DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

A CRJ900 is a DC9 size aircraft and should be payed accordingly, certainly not at 50 seater rates.

 

I concede there is a TON of ill-informed, borderline ignorant posting in the Regional forum here...much like Flightinfo. That covers all sides (pro vs con union, for example).

I think all pilots, but specifically regional pilots and those wanting to become regional pilots should educate themselves on the topical issues facing the industry as well as the 2-3 decades worth of history in the airlines. Flying the Line Volume 2 and Hard Landing should be required reading, and anybody can get a free subscription to Aviation International News by clicking this link.

Alright - we're both in agreement here! What is your idea of standing together?

 

too funny, you make my point. The fact that guys are happy making the pay they do and continue to do it is sad. I habe many friends in many walks of life, like we all do. Several folks in accounting, and 1 that is a laywer that turned down several jobs due to low wages. Where we pilots are jumping thru hoops to make 20k, and then try to sell to us that since you make x $ per seat its OK. Like its been said over and over, we pilots are our own enemies.