Wages may need to be addressed, but you've noticed (even in this article) the Feds and ALPA have both started steering the issue to more of a training problem than a pay problem. My guess is that the low wages issue will be squashed by the RAA and ATA in exchange for a week longer in training.

 

IF our goal really is SAFETY, then better training may be a reasonable trade off. At my company, stall training events, for example, have changed from basically recovering from slow flight to actual stall recovery.

I want more money, but at the end of the day, I want to go home in one piece, and I want the guy/gal next to me to be up to snuff. And higher standards will eliminate some people: eventually higher standards should lead to higher pay.

 

I'm all for better training, but I doubt initial left seat training would have prevented the Buffalo crash. The captain messed up and that is most likely the result of a lack of good prior experience. Whether it was his lack of training as a student or his lack of training others as a CFI (to get memory sticking reaction to a stall) I don't know. However until ALPA gets serious about making 1st year pay at regionals a liveable wage we will never get where we need to be in trying to make 1st year FO's as safe as they can be. I don't remember the pscychologist, but there are certain things a human needs, and in certain order. Safety, Food, Security etc... are all at the top of the list. If an FO can't afford to support those items first then everything after that is negatively affected.

 

I believe its Maeslo's hierarchy of needs... or something like that.

 

Until the public is vocal and willing to pay more for a ticket to get a more experienced pilot, pay will not go up. If pay does not go up, a lot of experienced pilots will find other ways to support their families. The only way I'll go to the airlines after I retire from the Air Force is if I get on with a solid airline (doubtful) AND my investments have made it possible for me to support my family if I get furloughed. I love to fly, but I won't make my family eat Ramen to support my hobby. I'll find a higher paying job elsewhere and fly on my own on the weekends. And you know what? There will always be someone else to take that low paying job. I believe our collective love of flying will keep wages low forever...it's simple economics.

 

I agree for the most part. However, it is disheartening that you referred to our profession as a "hobby"......somewhat telling.

 

I like to take pride in things I do too, but don't tell me you joined this industry for other reasons like, good pay, benefits, and work rules?

 

Why? Whats wrong with picking a profession that pays well? When I began training, pre 9/11 wages were still around. The reason I picked this profession was that it would PAY well, and second, I thought it would be fun. I guess wrong on both accounts.

I really hate it when pilots basically say they 'had to do this', and they would do it for nothing. Its that attitude that has ruined, and will continue to bring this industry down. We all know that flying an airplane is funner than typing up spreadsheets, but is it really worth the cost? I think most of the new generation of future airline pilots (if educated about the realities of the industry) will choose different careers. Economically it doesn't make sense.

 

Exactly. I don't remember who said it, but he said: "I want my pilot well rested, well paid, and well fed." I can say that about my doctor, dentist, etc also. Anytime my wellbeing and safety are placed in the hands of another, I would want that person to be in a good state of mind. And here I am eating pb and jelly for every meal on a four day, and working on 4 hours sleep from the overnight. I think if passengers could follow a regional fo around for a month, see his work schedule and home life, they probably wouldn't be shopping expedia for their next ticket. In fact, they probably wouldn't get on another plane again.

 

If every US airline raised ticket prices to what they really should be, I guarantee that people will still pay the price and fly. Loads may drop for a short while, but would pick back up. This is a mobile and global society, people need to travel by air to get business done and for other needs. An airline ticket should never cost less than it would cost you to drive somewhere. Example: JFK-MCO, 1106 miles and 17 hours of driving, given a car that gets 24 mpg, that is 46 gals. of gas (at $2.75= $126.73). Now determine what your time is worth, for this example, we will just use $7.25 per hour (minimum wage). Airline flight is 2 hours, so 15 extra hours of driving= $108.75. So, to drive would actually cost you $235.48 (not including depreciation on the vehicle, oil, etc). You can buy a ticket on an airline for $79.00. I know most people think their time is worth a lot more than minimum wage, but as you can see, even at minimum wage air travel is still way underpriced! I didn't even include a hotel room on the way for those that can't drive the whole 17 hours direct.
Really want to see how cheap airline travel is? Look at JFK-LAX! Only $99! Now, look at the drive: 2813 miles, 43 hours driving ($311.75), 117 gals of gas ($321.75), maybe 2 nights in hotels at $80 ($160)...$793.50 Total! (This is only counting the actual driving as time, if you want to add 8 hours each night in hotels....it's more)
I wish the airlines would stop being such pussies when it comes to raising airfare. Put the price where it should be, people will still fly. If you fly it, they will come.