Comair isn't making those rates anymore after the concessions they took during Mother Delta's bankruptcy...and the fact that you think that was "mainline pay" speaks volumes about the compensation expectations of current-day small jet pilots.

I thought the one I read said 6/05. Is that not current? I am assuming that means June 2005.

Those rates are from the last effective year of their 2001 CBA.

After BK and a concessionary agreement, they don't exist anymore.

For context for my post above, let's look at MAG. Looking at their most recent financial data (includes subsidiaries), their block hours for the year stand at 571,827. Let's say that they stay in business for the next 25 years with no change, positive in negative, in either their pilot numbers or pilot efficiency (aka, pilot numbers stay the same, block hours stay the same). That equals out to 14,289,295,675 miles flown. Now, in 1996, the NTSB approximated that carriers experienced fatal .026 accidents per 100,000 flight hours, or about 3.8m flight hours between fatal accidents. It can certainly be argued that pilots make or break a carrier when it comes to accidents, simply on the statistics of pilot error vs mechanical concerns (I know, I know, if 8 things break that the pilot is supposedly able to deal with, and he/she can't and crashes, that's pilot error, but bear with me). So take those statistics, and Mesa will be exposed to about 3684 "potential accidents" (14b divided by 3.8m). It can certainly be argued that pilots make or break a carrier when it comes to accidents, simply on the statistics of pilot error vs mechanical concerns (I know, I know, if 8 things break that the pilot is supposedly able to deal with, and he/she can't and crashes, that's pilot error, but bear with me). So let's say that with any reasonable training (.026/100000 includes foreign countries too, so let's give MAG the benefit of the doubt) and maintenance, 95% of these situations can be averted. That still leaves 184 situations over 25 years where pilots make the difference. Let's assume that MAG is a much, MUCH less liable company than mine, and that they've figured that with all things considered, an accident will cost about $100m (that's basically the cost of the AC and 1.5m per pax, so no future loss of revenue, no realistic liability numbers, no raised premiums, etc) . That works out to about $18.4b in potential losses, or about $441k of potential savings PER PILOT PER YEAR! Of course, should pilots be paid that full amount? No, because of acceptable levels of risk, but should pilots at any carrier lay down and accept $20k salaries under the excuse that they aren't valuable enough of assets to earn more? Absolutely not.

Your name is boilerpilot but I'm not sure we went to the same school...you're way more smarter than I am, reasoning stuff out and everything...

My only hope is that maybe somebody who will, in the future, be in a position of power will take some of my arguments into consideration and really make a difference where it counts.

And it doesn't have anything to do with being smart, it's just forcing yourself to take a different perspective. Or being really anal. Or nitpicky. Or obsessive. Unfortunately, I think because of being at least slightly anal (hey now, all pilots are a little!) and.... picking nits, I've forced myself to have a different perspective. I'm not sure that's a positive thing :).

Thanks for all the comments. They have been insightful and have opened a good discussion.

I am still looking for SKW's pre 9/11 pay scale. If anyone out there has it, I would like to see it. I am unsure if it has really changed all that much. I understand that there hasn't been the same increase in pay that the pilot group should have received due to historical increases, but how far away from that are we?

ACA rates that were negotiated in 2001. The below rates are for the year 2004, as that is when the contract would have been up for renegotiation;

CA
1 59.71
2 61.56
3 63.47
4 65.43
5 67.45
6 69.54
7 71.69
8 73.91
9 76.19
10 78.55
11 80.98
12 83.48
13 86.06
14 88.72
15 91.47
16 94.21
17 97.04
18 100.00

The 18th year being the biggest highlight. It was the first CBA to see $100 for a 50 seat CA.

F0

1 23.17
2 36.81
3 37.95
4 39.12
5 40.33
6 41.57
7 42.87
8 44.18

Like I said, these are 2004 rates. IF the agreement would have been re-negotiated in 2004, and there was no "raising the bar" done, do the math. If the only gains were the usual 4-5% yearly raise due to DOS/longevity, the rates would be higher than just about every current 70/90 seat operator.

The SkyWest EMB rates have been the same since June of 2002, and if things stay the same will be that way until 2011. Absolutely no change in 5+ years. If I remember correctly there was a 2% increase between 6/01 and 6/02. The only change in the jet rates since then as well was the 1% at the beginning of this year. Nothing is planned for change in the rates until after 2010. The BHO will see a minor increase each January. Newhire pay was $19hr. back in 2000 when I started and still is. I didn't have to fly a 76 seat jet for it however.

Don't look for anything to change at SkyWest either as 65% of the pilot group just sent a strong message that they're happy with things just the way they are.