With all the talk on Regional pilot salaries.... Other countries have a government backed minimum amount a pilot can earn. Why in the heck can't we have this over here?


http://www.afap.org.au/files/RROI226...0GA%20AFAP.pdf

 

We all agree we are horribly underpaid. I know this personally as I work at Commutair. Our pay scale is a laughable. Do we really want the government involved in setting salaries? Sometimes it is necessary to look beyond our own issues and at the big picture. What direction is America heading? Do we want to move down the road toward such a huge federal government that it literally sets our salaries? Should there be a federally sanctioned minimum wage for every profession?

Something has to be down about pay and working conditions in our industry but i'm not sure having the government setting pay rates is the way to go. Perhaps updating or scraping the RLA might be a good start. Let us get paid for the actual time we work.

 

They've got a contract, you've got a contract. And they pay less for dues. But I don't think it's government backed anymore than your ALPA/Teamster contract is.

 

Beech nut is right. Exactly right. We will see no improvement whatsoever until the RLA is history. Simple as that.

 

Its called capitalism, and anything in this country (such as the RLA) that will impede on the "shareholder's pocket" and lean on the side of labor will simply never fly in this country, GREEED

I shall leave you with a quote from a Mr. Abraham Lincoln

Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

Until we get back to this type of mentality, it will be more of the same my friends

 

The Fair Labor and Standards Act has established federally mandated minimum wages since 1938; the government has been doing this for a while and there are many industry specific minimum wage laws. setting a minimum pilot wage is certainly not off the table nor should it be.

I strongly believe in a free market, however it is not perfect. One of the greatest injustices of Capitalism may in fact be the U.S. airline industry. Natural market forces exist which serve to do no more than further deteriorate this industry. It's known as the "race to the bottom." Sure, the public is served with lower prices and a better product (in theory) and those that can't fill this need and survive the competition are driven out. The problem is, you can't wait for the airplane crashes to discover the bad business. The industry has always been heavily regulated and always will be- natural economic forces undermine safety at the aim of meeting the bottom line. Colgan flight 3407 is bringing to light many of the economic issues in this industry which are only getting worse.

I in fact don't know a single person (read: consumer) who objects to the idea of paying $5-$10 more per ticket to insure their pilot is being compensated sufficiently to at least check in at a hotel for rest without having to sweat the financial consequences. The problem here is that no single airline can make this move without creating a competitive disadvantage for themselves. A change in rest rules and more stringent pilot training requirements (read: regulation) may serve to naturally force wages up, or a mandated wage will eliminate that competitive disadvantage because everyone will be forced to raise fares together. And at the expense of what? American capitalisim? I don't think so. What I see as a result is what Cpt. Prater of ALPA called, "The best safety device on any airplane - a well trained, well rested, and highly motivated pilot."

Pretty funny how 1. Training (read: expensive) 2. Rest (read: less means more productivity) 3. Motivation (read: good pay and a job at the majors!)
-All continue to be undermined in this industry in order to meet the bottom line. I'm not making this stuff up.

There is no simple bandaid for what we're dealing with here, this is an industry wide economic issue.

 

I beg to differ. If Priceline presented a consumer with two identical flights on airline A and B (who's safety track records are on par), where A's ticket costs $10 more than B's, but A's pilots are better paid and rested, I can almost guaruntee that most, if not all, would go with airline B. Heck, I had a pax once who lived in San Francisco, purchase a ticket to Boston via OAK-LAX-BOS, instead of SFO direct BOS. OAK flight went out late, misconnected, and then screamed bloody murder. I asked why they didn't buy the direct ticket, and the response was they saved 5 DOLLARS by connecting out of Oakland. They probably spent 10 dollars more on gas to save 5 on the airline ticket. And then much more than that on a hotel for the night because of the misconnect. Point being, I think people could give a rat's ass about anything else but the price of their airline ticket.

 

I agree with you 100%. The issue is that the flying public doesn't know of the issues affecting the regional airline industry. heck, most people don't know what a regional is. If a disclaimer was displayed before every ticket purchase, on the back of every ticket and next to the airworthiness certificate that read:

"Warning: This aircraft may read Continental on the outside but it is in fact operated by our regional partner, xxxx airlines, which is known to operate at a lower level of safety than said airline. The pilots of this aircraft are not guaranteed to be optimally rested because of currently established work rules and they have significantly less experience than our pilots employed by said airline. Results may vary."

Watch what that does to demand. This is the reality and it is just coming to light in the consumers eyes as a result of 3407. People are shocked to know a pilot can be hired with as little as $16,000/year in compensation. Like I said in my previous post, we can't wait for the crashes to occur before the public will stop flying. The race to the bottom is unacceptable.

 

I think the difference between your scenario above and FlightCheck's post is that the Priceline offer would include a disclaimer that "Airline B's pilot are not well rested and have been flying at maximum duty hours for a few days now"
In your scenario above - I would ASSUME that both airline's pilots are well rested, well trained, and BOTH airlines will safely transport me from point A to B.
Maybe with the disclaimer attached a consumer might then pay the extra $5-10 for Airline A's flight.

USMCFLYR

 

Ahhhh...more talk of socialism.