Roger Cohen and Phil "We fixed it" Trenary said the same thing.

I think one of the biggest problems is the mentality that pay should be based on what you fly. I don't care if it has 19 seats or 500 seats, you should be paid to fly as a professional pilot accordingly. It should be a longevity pay scale across the board. If you've been with the company 20 years and want to fly an RJ, you should have that option and still have the ability to make a decent living. If that means the junior guys are stuck flying across the pond making a lower wage until they build up their seniority, then that's how it should be since that's what their seniority holds. Personally, I have no desire to ever fly international routes, and I enjoy flying 5-6 times a day if it's an efficient schedule, but since the highest paying jobs appear to be long haul international flights (ignoring southwest in this example), that kind of forces people into them. Lets be honest, we all essentially do the same thing regardless of the size of the A/C (although I'm sure plenty of people on here are about to tell me otherwise).

Just wanted to add that I am against a minimum wage set for pilots. That's not to say I don't want pay to go up, but I want as little government involvement in this industry as possible. If we fix a number of deficencies in the overall setup of the seniority system, the pay issue will fix itself. It's not an easy fix, but I am holding on to the hope that changes for the better are coming.

Not one being in the industry I would have **assumed** (and we all know what that can lead too) that the pay went up with the bigger toys because you were reponsible for a more expensive piece of equipment, more lives (crew and pasengers), more risk (ETOPS), probably in the past the systems and knowledge might have been more complex, and it was just the way the airline went - start out on *smaller* equipment and strive to fly the heavy iron.

I like the idea of same pay based on senority I guess. I have always like the smaller, sleeker looking planes - probably why I have always been attracted to the corporate planes. But then there was a time when I didn't know what I knoew about the Regionals when I would have enjoyed (or thought I would have) gaining seniority in a good regional and staying on there, flying the CRJs/ERJs on shorter legs and because everyone was wanting to move up and out I would be able to gain the seniority that allowed me bid the best route fairly quickly.

But the more time I have spent on this forum in the last few years I have seen, heard, and learned more than I ever did beofre and am now much more knowledgeable about the realities of the industry.

Wags - why do YOU think that the higher pay goes to the bigger equipment?

USMCFLYR

The justification has always been that bigger equipment generate more revenue, which is not an unreasonable method. No practical business model could pay both seats in an RJ six figures...the necessary price increase would scare away a significant percentage of the pax. Conversely any 747 operator should easily afford solid six figure salaries for all crewmembers...if they can't then they are seriously mismanaging their business.

If pay went up strictly with seniority (ie UPS) the company might be hampered if it needed to downsize gauge...less revenue but same labor cost. Alternatively, the company might buy A380's...more revenue, same old labor cost.

This one-payscale system works at UPS because they only fly two types of airplanes...large and larger. For the pilots, seniority is used only for domicile/seat/schedule. Since they are not likely to need to change to smaller airplanes, the system works. If they replace all of the planes with A380's, the UPS pilots are going to be looking for a raise on the next contract (maybe they already have a provision, or a 747 cap)

It would be absurd to pay the cashier in the express lane 1/3 the wage as the cashier in the regular lane at the same store because the orders aren't as large.

Hi!

The cashiers are probably processing the same amount of $ per day, it is just the express cashier will have more customers.

cliff
NBO

Just trying remember 15+ years ago to when I worked a crappy retail job, but was heavily unionized and had way better benefits than I've ever had in the airline world, and paid well enough so I could afford college/flight training. Your statement is correct. Of course, it depended on the individuals efficiency.

Some were very efficient, didn't matter which station they worked on. At the end of the day and the report average was run, it could be in the $2000-2000/hr range intake with 27-30 items a minute scanned.

The inefficient down around the $1200-1400/hr with 20-22 items a minute scanned.

Like I said, that was an average report run, and those dollar figures are for early to mid 90's.

Imagine if that pay was based purely on efficiency?