I see the min guarantee as a salary that is overtime eligible. A flat standard salary gives no opportunity to earn extra income for additional work.

Therefore I fail to see the benefit of a flat salary..

Just my .02

 

Does your CEO get a flat salary?
How about the VP of HR? Director of Ops? The Chief Pilot?
Why aren't they hourly if its a better deal?

There is no benefit to a LOW base salary, but a high one is quite desirable.


Cape Air does pay duty time. Which enhances safety to a remarkable degree. With no economic penalty to delay or call off a trip due to weather or potential mx issue, you're much more comfortable making the safe call. One cruddy day the CEO of another Hyannis 402 operator offered his pilots a $100 bonus to operate. Suddenly the conditions were not too bad to fly in anymore.

Trip rigs were once the answer to the obvious inequity of long duty days combined with low credit flying. I think that amongst most regional airlines they are the stuff of legend. A 2:1 daily rig would go a long way to forcing trips to be more efficient, or paying you for your time.

Despite someone's observation, flying is not piecework. We are trading our time - our Life Capital if you will - for their money. You can never, ever get any more of yours (and you never, ever know when its going to run out) so make sure you are getting enough of theirs in the deal.

 

"our Life Capital"
We are tools, machines, mules. We are labor, Skilled labor yes, but labor just the same. To the company, our lives are only worth what we can provide them and how much they can be sued if we die. What is the difference between Chuck Yeager and a barely-pass-the-checkride pilot? Nothing. We both are "qualified" and do the same work.

Actually, flying IS piecework. We move X tons or our plane has X seats. We get paid more per ton or per pax: don't believe me, check out the pay rates at most (if not all) of the legacies and majors. They pay more for aircraft that can carry more. Is flying a 777 significantly different from flying a CRJ? No. Both take off, fly a route, and land. The DIFFERENCE is one carries a great deal more responsibility: 450 pax means nine time the number of lawsuits versus a 50 pax jet. That's why the guys that fly heavy iron are paid more. (However, if you think that is wrong, change the contracts. I would be thrilled to fly my Saab and make the same as an B747 pilot)

So, Rob, assume for a moment ALL your company's flying was done by mainline employees. Since we all do the same work, would you be willing to fight for my pay to be the same as yours despite the fact you carry 10 times as many pax?

 

Couldn't post a new thread, but here is my question

Part 135 Commuter AOC (NOT intrastate):

Is it legal for a company to require a pilot to show 1hr prior the departure and not pay for this duty time? Or would this be illegal? If you have have an argument legal references would be appreciated.

 

Is there a union contract involved? and would this company fall under the Railway Labor Act?

 

I've asked many, many pilots about this and nobody ever had a satisfying answer. When and how did getting paid only for flight hours develop? Was it like that for the PanAm clipper pilots? The Northwest Orient Stratocruiser drivers? The Braniff guys? Was it after Deregulation. I'd love to know the history of how this came about, among many other things, so I know who to be annoyed at.

 

Read "Flying The Line" parts I and II.

 

No.

Filler.
Filler.

 

Yes, it can be legal. But one would have to know the pay scheme. I know a 135 operator that pays whether or not you fly. Basically, a salary. A person could be "on duty", usable by the company, for 11 hours a day, 14 days straight.

 

The ignorance in this thread illustrates beautifully why pilots are raped in the wallet and in life, and will continue into the foreseeable future. Staggering really, the collective ignorance sucks the electrons back down the interwebz connection.