Yep...you are still acting as if you are with the RAA or you own a flight school. Are you advocating the Government (or someone other than airlines) should subsidize flight schools to help provide a cheaper path for flight training and low cost pilots for the regionals?

Some of the finer points of what you said...

This is what the RAA says. Why would you, as an alleged pilot, feel it's in pilots best interests to increase labor supply?

So you want to make piloting an airliner a totally blue collar occupation that requires no college but rather some low cost vocational training with on the job apprenticeships? Because that's what you just said.

Restoration of what? Airline profits? You are actually trying to tell us that an actual shortage of pilots is not going to help restore the profession?????

!!!??!?!? Really!? You definitely are working for the RAA. You probably aren't even a real pilot. My guess is that you are working with a PR company to troll forums trying to convince real pilots of the RAA agenda.

That makes no sense. It's like you're saying it because you think that's what pilots want to hear. Pilots don't want to see regionals lose money necessarily, they want to see them pay pilots professional and competitive wages and it's hard for them to do that if they don't make money. Ideally the regional jet flying should just be assimilated back into mainline flying along with the jets....and maybe replaced with more larger jets. The PR firm you work for can go find another client because the RAA will die along with the regional airline model.

That makes no sense either since I never said anything like that.

I don't understand what point you were trying to make on that last part. And by the way soccer is gaining ground in America lately too.

 

Pilot shortage affecting TSA:

Quote (Originally by v1valarob)---
Not a new guy to management tactics. My 4th rodeo, but K2 came in to new hire class and said that negotiation open later this year, but that upper management want the contract done by fall.*

I dont believe him, but its the rumor they want spread.
---End Quote---
I don't make it a habit to trust management.* That being said, if you look at this from the outside looking in, a labor dispute in the middle of trying to hire 600 pilots will not be good for business.* They know they are competing against PSA, Mesa, and Envoy with shiny new airplanes and/or flow-throughs.* They saw what bad labor relations are/were doing to places like Envoy and Expressjet.* More people leaving than coming on board.* When you're trying to triple the size of your airline, quick and dirty is the best way.

 

Company To Experiment With Valuing Employees | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

 

So what! if the stakeholders want well trained and professional pilots let them pay for it. Not the taxpayers!

 

When an accountant makes an adding mistake, a 100 people aren't killed or maimed. How much subsidy does the military industrial complex get? The pharma, then energy? I am not saying the government should subsidize any of these, what I saying is pretending the the airline industry is or should be turned over to the "free market" is ludicrous. Having an industry that is heavily regulated in terms of safety and access, yet totally unregulated in terms of pay and conditions does not work. That is one reason they have the RLA, to attempt to balance this dichotomy, but it hasn't worked either. The public safety is more important than the bottom line--that's the bottom line.

 

Free markets will cure all ills of this industry one way or another; we are really close to regulating and taxing this industry offshore or out of existence altogether. I have no problem allowing this industry to be re-regulated and looking like the early to mid 1970's.

 

I've always preached that seniority is the root of the pay issues with pilots. Pilots going through many jobs in their career and resetting their seniority each time.

Totally getting rid of seniority would create an interim period of chaos so that can't be done.

On the other hand I don't believe a national seniority system is the answer either because that would be logistically impossible.

The solution lies somewhere in the middle in that seniority rules should be flexible and relaxed based on circumstance. For example, it makes no sense for jet pilots to go back and forth between captain and co pilot from job to job...it's inefficient for safety and training costs.

It's also inefficient to allow pilots to jump back and forth between jets and bases all the time.

But a pilot who sticks around and is loyal to a company and a particular equipment should be rewarded with seniority.

That's how most businesses and careers work. There's no reason you can't have strong union contracts with relaxed seniority systems in place. In fact it would give the unions far better bargaining power and give the airlines far more hiring options.

It's free market and union negotiating side by side, under control benefiting everyone.

 

So you think we stand to collectively benefit from it costing the better part of a quarter million dollars to get a degree and ratings? How is pointing out that this is rediculous smack of "RAA" propaganda? And if I was so pro-RAA as you are lamely attempting to claim, why do I love to see the real time demise of the ACMI regional sector? Why do I want further (significant) scope restrictions on regional airlines? Why do I love to see the costs and pay at regionals go up as much as possile?

I absolutely do NOT want government subsidies for flight schools. "Education" (if you can call it that in so many cases) is past the breaking point of sanity and sustainability as it is because of government subsidies. Uncle Sugar throwing more entitlement/fake stimulus money at the problem is the LAST thing we need.

I'm talking about large airlines, who have a vested interest in at least having a supply of pilots, investing in experience based flight schools. You apparently don't understand that they are going to invest in flight training one way or the other. Right now they are hell bent on idiotic euro style "ab initio" all glass 6 figure "chosen one" flight schools, when what we need is experience. Experience that can (and should) be done in cheaper round dial GA trainers. Instead these MBA idiots are focused only on reducing the minimums and increasing the cost of training with their all glass insanity and a bunch of extremely expensive sims. If anyone is carrying the airline lobby's water its you.

You just don't want to admit it because you mistakenly want to believe that high costs to entry will usher in an era of pre-deregulation Cadillac a month prosperity. It won't. It will exacerbate the current crisis and dramatically increase the likelihood that we will see more subsidies for flight schools, lower ATP mins and/or an MPL system, none of which will translate into higher pilot pay in the long run. The next step beyond that if, of course, cabotage. If we don't achieve a training infrastructure to meet demand, we will be at the mercy of anyone else that does and it won't be pretty.

I'd like to see another, much stronger, General Aviation Revitalization Act passed, which would help fuel GA in general and flight training in particular not with subsidies, but with tort reform at the manufacturing and instructing levels. I want to see much stronger protections against the scum filth concept of cabotage. And we need to have a winning stratedgy to fight the dual subsidized foreign enemy airlines on all fronts.

It may be comforting to you to sit back, do nothing and think that the insane cost creep for education in general and pilot training in particular will automatically make it rain money for pilots and that's all we have to do for great success. That will not work.

You can disagree all you want, but please cease and desist with your baseless accusations that I'm pro-RAA. That organization is full of no talent hack scum bags and I'm loving the self imposed crisis they are in the midst of. I am against their attempts to lower minimums and get some MPL style ststem in this country. And I want to see a large chunk of their business taken away from them with improved mainline scope clauses, and those that try to go IndyAir II I want to see buried by the competition. You will find fewer people more against the RAA than me anywhere.

By the way its you that want to apparently do away with unions and seniority lists, which is one of the most anti-labor shill points of view in airline history. You will never, and I mean ever, get to slide on over to a legacy mainline one single number above the most junior pilot on property before you were hired. Ever. You want that, go to China. Have fun. You will never get that here.

 

Yes of course we (pilots) do...unless by "we" you are referring to the managers and owners of airlines (aka...your people).

Did you say that? I can't think of anyone who would love to see the costs of regionals go up except for the management of it's competitor. You snuck the word "pay" in there but it's unlikely they can raise pay if their costs go up so that whole thing makes no sense.

Good...but that's not what you said

You did say this, which is my point. Why would you say this unless you were either the owner of a flight school or a manager of a RAA member company? And by the way...if you expect major airlines to subsidize flight training, you can be sure they will go to the Government for help doing it and that takes me back to the last thing you said.

And....this is no way benefits the airline piloting profession.

You said this already too....and it doesn't make me think any less what I said about you already. And don't try to turn this around on me...that's just silly.

As airline pilots, we shouldn't be concerned about helping the regionals find more cheap labor which seems to be all you talk about.

This may be a valid argument but only if you are running an airline on razor thin margins...or you own a flight school.

Same thing as above....although for the record, I do believe in keeping a strong GA in America and am personally actively involved in GA and have been a member of AOPA for over 30 years. I do understand that those are separate interests though.

I'm not sitting back....I'm here calling out guys like you.

You misunderstand. It's not about disagreeing with you. Everybody has priorities and I don't think there's anything unusual or necessarily wrong with the RAA having their agenda or for that matter the owner of a flight school. I'm just pointing out that your statements are more consistent with the agenda of the RAA and large flight schools and are not in line with what's best for professional pilots.

I make no secret that I think seniority lists are bad for the profession and good for management. Labor unions tend to support seniority lists but other than that I don't have anything against the unions. I've also demonstrated how the seniority system has worked to the advantage of airline management to lower labor costs over time.

A true advocate of regional airlines would fully embrace the seniority system knowing that it has made the business model possible. So defending the seniority system simply reinforces my belief that your agenda is pro RAA and pro large flight schools.

I have no need to advance over anyone's seniority. My agenda is more of a crusade to educate pilots and open their eyes rather than a personal need, but you already know that.

 

Suppose a major realized it could subsidize flight training and offer guaranteed jobs to graduates. Seems like a dream come true for a newcomer, right? But suppose there is a very, very long training contract associated with it, and new hires are locked in to a low, low pay scale indefinitely. The money United or American or whoever could save, even after $60,000 per student with some dropping out, would be substantial in the long run.

Is there anything to prevent the majors/legacies from taking a page out of Asia's book and doing this?