SharkAir

I'm not arguing anything. I'm just saying that while you're fighting for your higher pay, keep in mind that relative to much of the rest of the world, you're pretty well off. But I'm all for making more; if someone is willing to give me more money, I'll take it, starving children or not.

SharkyBN584

I got no dog in the fight, but I've compared and contrasted the ASA TA against RAH's 2002 contract (which gets called bottom-feederish by that OTHER coex carrier ) and that led to roommate #1 being one of the 16%. Truer words were never spoken (or written in this case).

P.S. - XJT guys, it's a joke. That's what the means.

fosters

Right, which was my point. Ask yourself, why do union pilots make more money? Is it because they make more money for their respective companies, or because they used their leverage to an unfair advantage?

Fair market value if you negotiate on equal terms. Unions are the work place equivalent of stacking the deck in labors favor. Not that I'm against that - far from it seeing as I am part of the labor pool - but let's call a spade a spade.

POPA

You do realize that the fact you're typing on a computer this very minute means you're better off than a huge percentage of the world's population, right?

SharkAir

Um, yeah? Wasn't I saying something to this effect?

Flaps50

You can't negotiate with a public company as a private individual line pilot in todays world. Who would have invested the mega bucks to become an ATP with a future of 60K a year. Not me.

The argument is absurd. If you want to make that argument, I say get rid of the airline management skewed Railway Labor Act. Allow us to strike anytime a contract is infringed upon, and let's see where a true free market gets us when we can shutdown the country's travel anytime we want if we're not happy. Check the value then. Allow us to truly get together and negotiate as one complete entity of 70,000 people at once. Free means free, and guarantee you that when those planes are parked management will come knocking. Right now they can hide behind the RLA for years pitting one group against another as well as get the courts to abrogate contracts, and that is why wages have fallen in the airlines.

Flaps50

Dude you're crazy! Do you really believe that Management is at a disadvantage over labor when it comes to contract talks? Maybe in a true free market, but in the US there are laws that lean to managements' side. In other places where they don't have labor laws the Army comes in and kills a few worker so everyone goes back to work. Actually that's happened here too.

fosters

Because we've artificially raised the pay rates, more people learn to fly, flooding the market with supply. Had those pay rates never been inflated, less pilots would have entered the marketplace, therefore reducing supply, increasing demand, and increasing the wage. No need for unions to do so. You can bet they wouldn't be anywhere near $300k/yr though.

You entire paragraph validates my statement. Going on strike, negotiating as one entity, etc. does NOT mean you are operating under a free market. In fact, you have the company, and the public, at bay. Look at what the NYC subway workers (or was it bus drivers?) did - went on strike and got what they wanted because they exerted their leverage. That doesn't sound very capitalist or free market-ism to me.

I agree a union is a necessary evil in our line of work, but you really need to stop and think about it for a second. Skybus, jetBlue, Virgin America etc. reflect how the free market treats airline pilots these days.

fosters

At the major level, absolutely. At the regional contract level, not so much. Well it's not that one companies management is at a disadvantage, it's really that the regional pilots are more disadvantaged as a whole, what with all these alter-ego carriers, whipsaw, and what not. (IMO of course)

Of course there are. But there are also laws that lean toward labors side as well, which your second sentence touches on.

Flaps50

In my rant I was referring to a "free" market being no laws to prohibit anything including negotiating as a group. Just because you use leverage to negotiate something in your favor does not mean you are anti free. It means you're smart. Companies do it all the time, are they not playing fair.

There are plenty of consortium style companies out there that use the masses to procure products and services at better rates. Does that mean they are "unionized". What's the difference. You'd be crazy not to use your leverage as a group. Believe me companies understand this.